Social Platform Trust & Safety

There are also the industrialized battalions running variously sophisticated ops to make the “public conversation” look like something it isn’t—to accelerate discord, to fake overwhelming support or opposition for an entity or idea, to make a group look stupid or dangerous-and-therefore-worthy-of-extermination, often by pretending to be a member... See more

We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men’s labor. Here are two, not... See more

All of these ideas are free-speech friendly. They do not involve top-down censorship, but bottom-up user choice. Letting people police the content on their own pages and feeds is the natural next step for platforms that want to empower users rather than constantly surveil and censor them. Such features are also just common sense. No one has an... See more

And yet, precisely as the platforms became more universal, they became more destructive of community. Communal in clusion relies on ex clusion: some notion of who is and is not a member of the group, and some ways of enforcing that boundary.

Proactive Solutions to Tech-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence

town square that spans the entire globe. Our aim, then, is to show a way past this impasse. The two views ar

Not all conflict is bad. Disagreement — over taxes, education, or policy — is essential to a healthy democracy. But affective polarization isn’t about differing ideas. It’s about identity.

It emerges when people begin to dislike, distrust, or even dehumanize others because of who they are — their ethnicity, region, religion, political affiliation,... See more