← All dilemmas
🔒freedom
Governments can prevent terrorist attacks by reading everyone's private messages — but there will be zero privacy. No exceptions.
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 “Allow it. Safety first” prioritises personal freedom; choosing “Refuse. Privacy is non-negotiable” 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
- 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.
- A theme park gives priority access to people with invisible disabilities. Some visitors think the system is abused. Should proof be required?