Algorithms used by tech companies, such as those that recommend content or filter information, are often proprietary and closely guarded secrets. Proponents argue that transparency would prevent abuses and ensure fair practices. Opponents argue that it would harm business confidentiality and competitive advantage.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Yes
@B3VGV2T 4mos4MO
To support the idea that social media should be regulated, consider these points: misinformation poses a serious threat to public health and safety, hate speech can incite violence, and data breaches can harm individuals and communities. Regulation can help mitigate these risks while upholding freedom of speech.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
1. Combating Misinformation and Disinformation:
Impact:
Misinformation spread on social media can undermine public trust, influence elections, and even lead to dangerous outcomes, like vaccine hesitancy or violence.
Example:
The spread of… Read more
@B7GRW8B1wk1W
Places like Twitter have regulations that ban harmful content, but most of the time that harmful content stays posted up and Twitter does nothing about it.
Social media algorithms should be regulated to be less addictive, not regulated based on what they show
@B76CXH43wks3W
Misinformation and Public Health:
COVID-19 pandemic: A 2021 Harvard Kennedy School study found that 12 individuals were responsible for up to 65% of vaccine misinformation on social media — yet platforms were slow to act.
Result: Millions were exposed to false claims, contributing to vaccine hesitancy and preventable deaths.
🔹 Mental Health and Youth:
Internal research from Facebook (now Meta), leaked by whistleblower Frances Haugen, revealed:
“Instagram makes body image issues worse for 1 in 3 teen girls.”
CDC data (2023):
1 in 3 high school girls reported seriously considering suicide.
Many experts link rising mental health issues to social media overuse and harmful content.
🧠 Why this matters: Waiting for a “serious allegation” ignores the daily, ongoing mental health impacts happening right now.
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
Yes, and all software and algorithms should be open source
@B78M3MWProgressive2wks2W
All software and algorithms should be open source so that software can be run cheaper and more vulnerabilities and possible holes in software can be fixed and maintained by members of the community, offering a much deeper and better connection with the people and software.
Open sourced algorithms and software can be used by countries who we are against, harming national security.
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
No, only if there are serious allegations of harm or misconduct
@B3VGV2T 4mos4MO
A strong counter-argument to the "no regulation except for serious harm" stance is that a more proactive approach, including regulation of algorithms and platforms, is necessary to address systemic issues like misinformation, hate speech, and online harassment, even when individual cases of clear harm are not immediately apparent. This approach acknowledges that platforms' architectures and algorithms can amplify harmful content, and that regulating platforms proactively can prevent broader damage.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
Addressing Systemic Issues:
The &quo… Read more
Regulation of Social Media overall would reduce the possibility of harm, as posts and content could be monitored more effectively to reduce these cases.
Social media is dangerous because it imposes unrealistic standards on people however government involvement in it is not better.
@B7L6T5R2 days2D
Transparency is important within social media because it allows customers and other people to see what is happening behind the scenes.
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
Yes, and should also share their algorithms with their customers
@B7L6T5R2 days2D
Allow people to see things like data and tables and flow charts, and maybe eve code, to promote transparency.
@B793LY52wks2W
The algorithms are manipulating everyone and encouraging anger and rage. This makes it difficult for people with certain beliefs to hear or see anything outside of their bubble.
@9MR5C9TRepublican1yr1Y
Large Tech companies should be required to give up algorithms to regulators only if there is proof of suspicious acts where the tech company has committed fraud, scams, or other criminal acts to the detriment of the consumer.
@9K99V29 1yr1Y
@9MNGKL21yr1Y
No, but if it's a threat to the common safety or the nation, then allow it.
@9R8SQN21yr1Y
Yes, it's similar to how food must come labeled with ingredients. Consumers should be allowed to know what and why they are ingesting certain info.
@DeterminedP0l1cy1yr1Y
But Coca-Cola doesn't have to spill the beans on its secret recipe. It's a trade secret, and forcing them to share it would kill their edge in the market. What if requiring companies to disclose algorithms ends up stifling innovation? How do we balance transparency with protecting competitive advantages?
@9YFTCQT11mos11MO
The government should consider mandating the transparency of algorithms used by large tech companies to prevent societal harm and fraud.
@9RLPHBWIndependent1yr1Y
Yes, but the information should not be public to other companies or even the people unless necessary.
@B3Z347Y7mos7MO
Yes, companies like Nvidia and other software industries have taken too much advantage of abadonware, if they don't want to support their code, let the people do it for them.
@B6VST5CRepublican1mo1MO
I think after a certain period of time, it should be mandated to share. I believe that a company has the right to its own property for a short period of time before sharing its product
@B5XPM8FIndependent3mos3MO
Yes, but the regulatory capacity must be non-political and designed to avoid capture by industry or special interest groups.
@B4RTX8T6mos6MO
Algorithms today are destroying who we are, what we see and how we behave. No single company should have sole oversight over it. Open source algorithms, not their entire tech. To keep them in check.
@9X9CQ9J11mos11MO
Large tech companies should share their algorithms with regulators if their platforms are harmful towards society, including a large demographic of teenagers.
@9TMPR971yr1Y
Yes, large tech companies that use algorithms to manipulate users should be required to open-source their algorithms for public review.
@9RDML6X1yr1Y
Intellectual property is a real thing, however the government getting into private business goes against America as a principle
@9PZ2HB51yr1Y
Depends on the situation, for example if a big tech company is suspected of doing wrong doing with their algorithm and in order to stay relevant and not screw anyone over, they should comply with regulators unless the company is paying them off.
@9RNXRTN1yr1Y
If the government is experts and not a bunch of senior citizens asking tech giants embarrassing irrelevant questions and demonstrating no knowledge of how the algorithms work even as a user
@9RPFLXP1yr1Y
Regulators typically refers to the administrative bodies that set the rules for specific fields. Think EPA, FDA, FCC. These regulators are experts in the field and will know the ins-and-outs of the topic much better than Congress.
@B7LV8YR1 day1D
Difficult question to answer. While tech companies are private companies, the mis-handling of data on US citizen also poseses a national threat from within and foreign actors. When large countries like China use their government to actively look for ways to gather data and information on non-citizens, US citizens also need to economy of scale of the government to protect our data assets.
@B7LRR9T1 day1D
platforms with access to peoples personal information should be watched carefully for misconduct like selling others info.
@B7L6YSX2 days2D
It depends if there is corruption or some type of monopoly growing also if there could be large benefit for the public think knowledge should be accessible.
@B7L5NTW2 days2D
Yes, but there should be some type of safeguards for the companies that invented or wrote the code or the business or software, and if it’s found that that software or business leaks it, especially to an outside company or country espionage should be brought against the people who violated regardless of if they are in a position of high authority or not
@B7L4XVDIndependent2 days2D
No, the government should partner with tech companies to create an oversight committee to assist with regulation.
@B7KLDG5Peace and Freedom4 days4D
A balanced approach with confidentiality protections and oversight might promote accountability without compromising innovation.
@B7KGZ674 days4D
If its how the algorithm WORKS, thats fine and should be shared with content creators, but if its people's personal algorithms/feeds then no
@B7K73N44 days4D
Most companies should, yes, as it should regulate personal information being spread without an individual's consent or knowledge.
@B7K4DT25 days5D
There should be one specially trained person who regulates only that place and signs an NDA contract only stating whether the algorithm is ok.
@B7JXL9G5 days5D
No, the government should not require tech companies to share their algorithms because doing so could harm their business and reveal trade secrets. However, if there are serious allegations of misconduct, companies should be required to release their algorithms but only under extremely strict supervision to ensure competitors cannot figure out their codes or how their products work.
@B7JTRJP5 days5D
The government should not be allowed to have access to tech companies' algorithm information. Tech companies should reduce or eliminate the intrusiveness and manipulative nature of internet algorithms.
@B7JPRH2Natural Law5 days5D
The government should have regulatory power. But, they should access algorithms when asked by oversight or in emergencies
@B7JL8YV5 days5D
The algorithms shouldn't be public for civilians but if suspicious activity happens on an algorithm then I believe the government should have access
@B7J98GL6 days6D
I am in the middle of this because people may have worked very hard to get those algorithms, and that is why they are successful. Customers should definitely know what they are purchasing. Both the proponents and opponents have great points.
@B7HX82P6 days6D
Yes, regulators should have access to ensure that the companies are following all rules and regulations.
@B7HL9GS6 days6D
Yes, but only to a government department whose sole purpose is to make sure online services are legal and regulated
@B7HK32Q 6 days6D
I think it should be open source to out government if they was us to use the app, but only them, and kept mostly private to other eyes
@B7HJMND7 days7D
Certain specifics about an algorithm should be shared with regulators, such as viruses, data collectors, etc.
@B7H4LP21wk1W
Tech companies should be regulated, but if possible in a manner that doesn't violate copyright secrets.
@B7H3DZS1wk1W
A better definition of data ownership is needed. An ability to temporarily allow access to data such that if a user dislikes how an algorithm is used the user can remove past data as well as abstain from future contributions
@B7H2ZJN1wk1W
No, but if they add things that shouldn't be exposed to children in an early age then yes they should.
I think anything that prohibits large tech companies of abusing their system and having it be predatory to their customers is a good thing I believe a lot of tech companies have gotten the past in recent years and have became more predatory on customers and consumers like now you could talk about something in 10 seconds later we recommended that item on your phone I believe it should be open I believe they should be transparent with their consumers of what they use and how they use it and I believe that you should be held accountable for things that they use that are predatory
@B7GBH731wk1W
Yes and with AI we need a regulatory board like the CDC for algorithms. World Algorithms Safety and Integrity Association WASIA, all AI needs to be slowed down for 5-8 years while we work on this internationally.
@B7G2DRM1wk1W
Yes, all software and algorithms should be open source and be required to share them with their customers.
@B7FQZ8L1wk1W
Yes, but with limitations like only telling regulators a limited amount of info so it does not disrupt businesses
@B7FN9J31wk1W
Yes, provided regulators have legitimate cause of suspicion, and confidential for a period of time before being released to the public as to not require trade secrets be revealed
@B7DY8GC2wks2W
Yes if the algorithm introdouces abuse of power, and censorship. free speech is NEEDED, if not, then no, make it public to everyone as they would have nothing to hide.
@B7D5GLP2wks2W
They should but also have some of the algorithm remain anonymous to the company since they are the ones sharing it I the first place.
@B7D4NGG2wks2W
They should share small details but not all because it would be bad for business if all companies knew the same things. It would basically be the same quality tech just for higher or lower prices.
@B7D26TV2wks2W
Should provide enough information to appease the public without giving away too much information because their companies are private and do also deserve confidentiality.
@B7CTWQF2wks2W
Yes and no, I think it would be important if there are scams happening, but if not I think that is their private info
@B7CKST32wks2W
No, and the government has no right to get trade secrets (not necessarily intellectual monopolies) without a warrant.
@B7CH2L62wks2W
No, but large tech companies need to prove through governance that there are guards to ensure that the algorithms aren't going rogue, and aren't interfering with existing laws. IE: Race discrimination in HR Application algorithms.
@B7CDHWVRepublican2wks2W
Algorithms used by major tech companies need to be checked otherwise there is a large amount of risk and danger for the average consumer.
@B7C966V2wks2W
The government should consider mandating that large tech companies share their algorithms with regulators to enhance transparency and accountability, while also ensuring that proprietary information and trade secrets are protected.
@B7C3CQ32wks2W
There should be specific protections for consumers where there is harm. This regulation should be an independent body from political parties.
@B7C38KJ2wks2W
Certain things such as content or filter information should be shared, but the business aspects that make the company good competition should be secrets.
@B7BJC2P2wks2W
that is give a take if they want to if it's something minor then no but something they could have everybody yes
@B7BHLY32wks2W
why? do they isn't it theirs ti begin with unless our bargaining and sharing profits they don't have to give their rightfully owned algorithms
@B79YKXQ2wks2W
Yes, they don't have to send out secrets, just have someone check to make sure there's nothing scetchy
@B79SC572wks2W
No, there will always be people to misuse their privileges and that will only allow danger to happen. We need to be safe.
@B79BT4CIndependent2wks2W
Yes, Regulators should be able to examine large tech algorithms, but through secure, risk-based oversight
@B78SHRPLibertarian2wks2W
No, but companies should be encouraged to share and be open with their customers as to how their data will be utilized. They should also have to obtain consent from the customer before selling data.
@B78M5WF2wks2W
I think any algorithm that affects personal beliefs/stances should be open. I think each individual should read the terms of these algorithms and if they accept, they can use and if not, they shouldn't use. I think if something is patented though then the government shouldn't interfere with it.
@B78CVTG3wks3W
Algorithms should be open source, but the federal government shouldn't be able to regulate it at all, let the people handle it.
@B784QBT3wks3W
Make exactly what it does visible and allow the algorithm to be seen if there are allegations of harm or misconduct but hiding it from competitors is the way of capitalism. However, if everyone was forced to show it then the country would advance at a faster pace. Perhaps that isn't what we need though.
@B77V4443wks3W
No, in this case it will be up to the market to create an open source model similar to how DeepSeek was created and could rival OpenAI open release
@B77SDYX3wks3W
Yes, but it must be handled very carefully. Giving regulators access to large tech companies' algorithms can help improve transparency and protect users from harm. However, this information is highly sensitive and could be misused if it falls into the wrong hands, so strict safeguards would be essential.
@B76YW2B3wks3W
Yes, to ensure accountability and prevent harmful biases, but with strict safeguards to protect trade secrets and user privacy.
@B76R9DG3wks3W
Yes there should be some fairness to what info needs to be shared. However the government should not abuse this power. And should only require the information for threats only.
@B76PKNZ3wks3W
No because even if they gave the shooter the weapon doesn't mean that they are held responsible for another mans action.
@B76M9FF3wks3W
My thought when it comes to this is that yes, it should be open source to the public but make sure copyright laws cover their intellectual property
@B76DNSZ3wks3W
Big Tech companies have a right to privacy under the Constitution. The Government cannot merely take algorithms, which are property of the company, at will. Only if the government has a warrant may regulators see these algorithms.
@B769YZC3wks3W
Mandating algorithm sharing could increase accountability, but without strict legal safeguards, it could also expand opportunities for government surveillance.
@B75XZSR3wks3W
Yes and no because someone could try to hack the tech companies and yes because people have tech issue all the time that other tech companies can't figure out.
@B75SGC83wks3W
I'm okay with this too an extent till they start sharing personal info such as sss or credit card #'s
It should only be shared for that single person and not everyone else's information, and only be used for a desperate emergency
@Cam-WilsonLibertarian3wks3W
This is a complicated question, as private companies do have a right to privacy, however their policies affect the public and therefore they need transparency
@B74ZM223wks3W
Yes, algorithms should be open source with strict copyright policies regarding intellectual property
@B74QW263wks3W
No, unless there are serious allegations of harm. However, there should be minor incentives to sharing them.
@B74P3HT3wks3W
They could used that information in a bad intention to create propaganda but if its controlled then i see no wrong in the government having that information
@B74534F3wks3W
If algorithms impact mass human attention, they need to be open-source and treated as utilities. Otherwise no, govt has no room to control private property preemptively except in the express interest of the public at large on a case by case basis.
no because i feel that we as america are the strongest country and we have the best technology. to share our technology would be sharing it with foreign adversaries.
@B73NN643wks3W
Kind of, The government should be able to get the needed information but they should not need to control everything.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
