← All dilemmas
🤖technology
Should social media platforms face legal consequences when their algorithms amplify harmful content linked to teen suicides, even if they did not create the content themselves?
Vote to reveal how SplitVote voters split.
YOUR CHOICE
OR
Anonymous voting. No account required. Results update in real time.
Why this dilemma matters
Technology rarely asks for permission once it works, so the ethics has to land before deployment. Choosing “Yes, because companies must be held accountable for the real-world harm caused by their platform's design choices and amplification systems” prioritises the capability it unlocks; choosing “No, because this could lead to excessive censorship, stifle free expression, and place an impossible burden on platforms to pre-screen all content” gives more weight to the agency it costs.
Worth asking yourself
- What would you give up to keep this capability?
- Who benefits from this, and who absorbs the risk?
More Technology Dilemmas
- An AI generates a masterpiece painting with no human creative input. Who owns the copyright?
- A self-driving car's brakes fail. It must choose: swerve into a barrier (killing the passenger) or hit a pedestrian who jaywalked.
- Scientists can upload your consciousness to a computer perfectly. Your biological body must die in the process. Is the digital version still you?
- You can permanently delete all social media from existence. The world becomes slower and less connected, but global mental health improves 40%.