I’ve been reading “The age of surveillance capitalism” and the author posits that once social networks start censoring users, they become responsible for the moderation of the platform 

Today tech CEOs testified at Congress and it seems that majority of the senators want *higher* moderation on these platforms

they/them, candlemaker at 🕯️humankind 🕯️, seemore.tv/humankind, hosting /samantha, /humankind

My q to the philosophy channel is how do you build an uncensored social platform at scale when there is harm such as CP, sextortion, scams, bots etc. 

In this context harm is subjective. I don’t mean harm = illegal. CP is illegal, sending 1000 $DEGEN and getting 10k back is a scam but not illegal. They are both bad.

Building /bracket | Ex-BCG, ex-PHD | Poli Sci + Econ + Philosophy | Hosting /gray + /nfl + /dont-do-this + /book-clubs

neuroscience PhD, onchain chaplain for /spirituality, vibe imagineer for /christin, co-host of /bcbhshow for the farcaster middle class. seemore.tv/christin

@christin @tldr would love to get your thoughts on this if you are open to it. I know it’s a heavy topic but I am so curious, if you have the capacity.

This moderation game gave me some insights into how challenging the issue is…

I tried it and couldn’t even get through round one. Thanks so much for sharing that!

This moderation game gave me some insights into how challenging the issue is…

https://moderatormayhem.engine.is/

I heard Lens is experiencing on-chain blocking?