← All dilemmas
🕊️freedom
È giusto per una piattaforma online censurare automaticamente contenuti controversi sui temi politici e religiosi per prevenire la radicalizzazione, sapendo che questo algoritmo potrebbe anche silenziare legittime voci di dissenso?
Vote to reveal how SplitVote voters split.
YOUR CHOICE
OR
Anonymous voting. No account required. Results update in real time.
Why this dilemma matters
Liberty and safety are both costs, not just benefits — every line drawn pays for the other. Choosing “Sì, perché la prevenzione dei discorsi d'odio e della manipolazione violenta deve avere la priorità, salvaguardando la stabilità sociale” prioritises personal freedom; choosing “No, perché automatizzare la censura erode il pluralismo delle idee e affida a un software il giudizio su ciò che è accettabile” gives more weight to collective safety.
Worth asking yourself
- How much risk is the freedom worth?
- Is the safer option also the more honest one?
More Freedom Dilemmas
- Governments can prevent terrorist attacks by reading everyone's private messages — but there will be zero privacy. No exceptions.
- A politician spreads false claims that lead to harassment and violence in some communities. Should they be permanently banned from all major platforms?
- Vaccines are 99% effective and safe. Should they be legally mandatory for school attendance, even for parents with religious objections?
- A city offers to eliminate all violent crime by installing 24/7 AI surveillance on every street corner and public space.