@ISIDEWITHQuestionsTechnologicalStarted 11mos agoActive 17hrs 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 72.6k Canada voters.

59%
Yes
41%
No
58%
Yes
40%
No
0%
Yes, and all software and algorithms should be open source
1%
No, only if there are serious allegations of harm or misconduct
0%
Yes, and should also share their algorithms with their customers
0%
No, and the government has no right to interfere with private intellectual property

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 72.6k Canada voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 72.6k Canada voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

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

 @B46V7MRfrom Alberta  answered…4wks4W

Consumers should not use products that are not suitably transparent. I avoid any product that requires I use my real name or create a user account. I would prefer a cultural shift where the average person could not be persuaded to use a product with no algorithmic transparency.

 @B2WVT6Ffrom Ontario  answered…2mos2MO

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

 @9SSRG9Hfrom Manitoba  answered…8mos8MO

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…3mos3MO

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

 @B4F65ZGfrom Ontario  answered…2wks2W

Yes, under strict guidelines to ensure compliance from tech companies without jeopardizing their proprietary information.

 @B4DLCL7from Quebec  answered…2wks2W

as long as there is transparency and every thing is clear they can, but if no and they have other goals for checking them, then they have no rights.

 @B47XK9Dfrom Alberta  answered…3wks3W

tech companies should not have access to any of your information nonetheless sell it to other companies

 @B43SXTX from Alberta  answered…4wks4W

Support disclosure for high-impact algorithms (e.g., those affecting elections, hiring, healthcare, or financial services).

Push for independent audits rather than full government access—third-party groups could assess fairness and safety without exposing trade secrets.

Encourage transparency reports where companies explain how their algorithms work in general terms without giving away proprietary code.

Ensure user choice & control so people can opt out of certain algorithm-driven decisions or customize what they see.

Latest News

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

 @Vot3rVo1ceChloefrom Ohio  submitted…4mos4MO

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…3mos3MO

Supreme Court Clears The Way For Trump Sentencing

Donald Trump will face sentencing over his New York “hush money” conviction on Friday, after the US Supreme Court declined to grant him a last-minute reprieve.The decision will force the president-elect to face public proceedings in the criminal case that he has fought strenuously to avoid. His lawyers had appealed to the high court on Wednesday to postpone the proceeding, claiming that allowing it to go ahead days before his inauguration would create a “constitutionally intolerable risk of disruption to national security” and interfere with his efforts to get his 34 felony convictions overturned.In a 5-4 decision handed down just hours before the sentencing was set to go ahead in a state court in lower Manhattan, a majority of the justices declined to do so, saying “the burden that sentencing will impose on the president-elect’s responsibilities is relatively insubstantial” especially as Trump was unlikely to face any prison time. They added that any issues with the evidence presented at trial — some of which Trump’s lawyers have claimed was inadmissible — “can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal”.Trump-appointed Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined Chief Justice John Roberts and the three liberals on the bench in refusing to grant Trump’s appeal.Trump said in a post on Truth Social that he appreciated the Supreme Court’s time but vowed to continue fighting the case. “For the sake and sanctity of the Presidency, I will be appealing this case, and am confident that JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL,” he said.Lawyers representing Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Trump’s sentencing was repeatedly postponed while he mounted his third campaign for the White House and pursued various appeals against his conviction. Last week Judge Juan Merchan, who oversaw the “hush money” trial in New York earlier this year, finally set a firm date, in order to bring what he called “finality to this matter”.Trump will probably not face any punishment when he is sentenced, however, as the judge previously indicated he would not impose a fine or condemn Trump to prison time.

▲  1619 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…5mos5MO

Chaos in Europe: Germany’s Government Collapses As Trump Returns

Germany’s coalition government collapsed on Wednesday after Chancellor Olaf Scholz sacked his finance minister Christian Lindner, plunging the eurozone’s largest economy into political chaos hours after Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election.Scholz told reporters he would table a confidence vote in parliament on January 15, which most observers expect him to lose. That will pave the way for snap elections in March.Lindner’s sacking and the departure of his pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) from the government brings the curtain down on a deeply unpopular coalition that had become a byword for discord and acrimony.It leaves a void at the heart of Europe just as concern is growing in EU capitals over what a second Trump presidency will mean for transatlantic relations.Germany and the rest of Europe now face a long period of uncertainty they can ill-afford as they brace for a trade war with the US while trying to fend off a growing economic threat from China.In a blistering statement delivered in the chancellery, Scholz blamed Lindner for the breakdown of the government, calling him “selfish” and “irresponsible”. He said he “cared only about his own clientele and the short-term survival of his own party”.The trigger for Lindner’s dismissal was a dispute over next year’s budget. The three coalition partners — Scholz’s Social Democrats (SPD), Lindner’s FDP and the Greens — could not agree on how to plug a €9bn hole in spending plans ahead of a meeting of parliament’s budget committee next week.However, the conflict became overlaid with deeper ideological divisions over how to deal with Germany’s economic downturn and how much public debt the government is legally allowed to raise.Scholz said he had asked Lindner to agree to loosen Germany’s “debt brake”, a cap on new borrowing which is enshrined in the constitution and which the SPD and Greens have long wanted to reform.That would have allowed Germany to take on more debt and so boost its support for Ukraine, at a time when fears are growing Trump might cut aid to Kyiv once installed in the White House.Scholz said he had also proposed capping network charges to bring down energy prices for industrial companies, creating incentives for businesses to invest, and passing a package of measures to safeguard jobs in the car industry, which faces more competition from China.

▲  299 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…6mos6MO

Trump’s Puerto Rico Problem Erupts in Pennsylvania: Latino Voters Fire Back

Donald Trump has a serious Puerto Rico problem — in Pennsylvania.Many Puerto Rican voters in the state are furious about racist and demeaning comments delivered at a Trump rally. Some say their dismay is giving Kamala Harris a new opening to win over the state’s Latino voters, particularly nearly half a million Pennsylvanians of Puerto Rican descent.Evidence of the backlash was immediate on Monday: A nonpartisan Puerto Rican group drafted a letter urging its members to oppose Trump on election day. Other Puerto Rican voters were lighting up WhatsApp chats with reactions to the vulgar display and raising it in morning conversations at their bodegas. Some are planning to protest Trump’s rally Tuesday in Allentown, a majority-Latino city with one of the largest Puerto Rican populations in the state.And the arena Trump is speaking at is located in the middle of the city’s Puerto Rican neighborhood.“It’s spreading like wildfire through the community,” said Norberto Dominguez, a precinct captain with the local Democratic party in Allentown, who noted his own family is half Republican and half Democratic voters.“It’s not the smartest thing to do, to insult people — a large group of voters here in a swing state — and then go to their home asking for votes,” Dominguez said.The timing couldn’t be worse for Trump. Almost a week before Election Day, he’s pushing to cut into Harris’ margins among Latinos, especially young men who are worried about the economy. But the comments from pro-Trump comedian Tony Hinchcliffe Sunday night, referring to Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage,” has reverberated throughout Pennsylvania and elsewhere, prompting even the former president’s Republican allies to defend the island and denounce the comments. And with the race essentially a toss up, every vote counts — especially in Pennsylvania.“This was just like a gift from the gods,” said Victor Martinez, an Allentown resident who owns the Spanish language radio station La Mega, noting some Puerto Rican voters in the area have been on the fence about voting at all.

▲  3116 replies