@ISIDEWITHQuestionsTechnologicalStarted 10mos agoActive 2wks ago

Should the government mandate that large tech companies share their algorithms with regulators?

Algorithms used by tech companies, such as those that recommend content or filter information, are often proprietary and closely guarded secrets. Proponents argue that transparency would prevent abuses and ensure fair practices. Opponents argue that it would harm business confidentiality and competitive advantage.

+
Expand
+ Settings

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 47.3k Canada voters.

60%
Yes
40%
No
60%
Yes
40%
No

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 47.3k Canada voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 47.3k Canada voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Canada voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @B2WVT6Ffrom Ontario  answered…4wks4W

i'm unsure as i don't properly understand the ramifications of too much or too little government oversight with tech

 @9SSRG9Hfrom Manitoba  answered…6mos6MO

Yes but only if it is in the best interest of the public to do so. For things such as healthcare and financial education.

 @B2BXZ8Jfrom Alberta  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, but only if those algorithms are kept confidential between the tech company and the regulator(s)

 @B3DQ7BNfrom Ontario  answered…2wks2W

No, but they should detail what the algorithm does and why it does what it does. They do not need to give away the code or trade secret, but they must show outcomes on a repeatable basis to prove function is not malicious.

 @9T35CHWfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

No; I suspect that if we ask for this, companies will simply block Canadian use like they did for news content.

 @9SZHZL3from Alberta  answered…6mos6MO

Tech companies are allowed to share generalized algorithms with regulators but not individual/personal ones

 @B387D5Qfrom Alberta  answered…2wks2W

there should be some for of oversigth coity to makr sure then no wantom abuse of public or privet data farming for corpret greed and malicius use of ai

 @B2VXQRMfrom Ontario  answered…4wks4W

No. But the public need to be educated on algorithms, how they work, and make their own decisions if the chose to use that app.

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Social Media Regulation” news articles, updated frequently.

 @Vot3rVo1ceChloefrom Ohio  submitted…3mos3MO

Trump meeting TikTok CEO as ban deadline looms

US President-elect Donald Trump is meeting the CEO of TikTok as the social media giant fights plans to have it banned in the US.Trump was due to meet Shou Zi Chew at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida on Monday, the BBC's US partner CBS News reports, citing sources familiar with the meeting.A law passed earlier this year means TikTok will be banned unless it is sold by its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, before 19 January.The company has made an emergency application to the US Supreme Court to have the ban delayed.The US wants TikTok sold or banned because of alleged links between ByteDance and the Chinese state, links that both TikTok and ByteDance have always denied.The bill introducing the law said it was intended to "protect the national security of the United States from the threat posed by foreign adversary controlled applications".Trump opposes the ban - despite supporting one during his first term - partly on the grounds that it could help Facebook, which he has accused of aiding his 2020 election loss.Trump's second term, however, won't begin until he is inaugurated on 20 January, the day after the deadline set out in the law.In its filing to the Supreme Court, submitted on Monday, TikTok asked for a "modest delay" to the enforcement of the ban to "create breathing room" for a review by the Court and to allow the incoming administration to "evaluate this matter".It described TikTok as "one of the most significant speech platforms" in the US and said the ban would do "immediate irreparable harm" to the company and its users.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4mos4MO

Peace Over Party: Arab American Leaders Stun Democrats with Mass Trump Endorsement

Former President Trump earned endorsements from "highly respected" Muslim leaders and Imams during a campaign rally in the battleground state of Michigan. Trump, speaking to a crowd in Novi, Michigan, on Saturday afternoon, called the group of Muslim leaders "highly respected," before bringing them onstage."I’m thrilled to accept the endorsement of these highly respected leaders," Trump told the thundering crowd.The group of leaders cited Trump’s commitment to ending wars and ensuring global peace as a primary reason for their support, describing him as a leader who "promises peace, not war.""We, as Muslims, stand with President Trump because he promises peace, not war!" Imam Belal Alzuhairi said. "We are supporting Donald Trump because he promised to end war in the Middle East and Ukraine," Alzuhairi said. "The bloodshed has to stop all over the world, and I think this man can make that happen. I personally believe that God saved his life twice for a reason.""We're going to stop the wars, we're going to make the United States safe again, and we're going to make the world safe," Bazzi said."What a nice endorsement," Trump said after Bazzi’s speech. "These are great people."The Muslim leaders official endorsement came after Amer Ghalib, the mayor of the Detroit-area suburb Hamtramck, announced his support of Trump in a Facebook post on Oct. 20."Though it’s looking good, he may or may not win the election and be the 47th president of the United States, but I believe he is the right choice for this critical time," Ghalib wrote in Arabic on his Facebook page. "I’ll not regret my decision no matter what the outcome would be, and I’m ready to face the consequences. For this, and for many other reasons, I announce my support and endorsement for the former, and hopefully, the next President of the United States, Donald Trump."Ghalib’s endorsement of Trump comes after the two met in Flint earlier this week for a private 20-minute conversation. Ghalib told The Detroit News that Trump "knew a lot about me before the meeting." "We talked about various topics including the debates, the polls updates, the statistics of votes in Michigan and Wayne County, the Arab American concerns and the Yemeni Americans in particular. We also talked about the situation in Yemen," Ghalib said.

▲  622 replies

Active 7hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3mos3MO

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  2019 replies4 agree1 disagree6