The EU's recent moves to tighten control over certain social platforms have sparked heated debate. When regulators step in to limit what can be said or shared, where's the line between public safety and overreach? Some argue that heavy-handed censorship sets a dangerous precedent, potentially stifling innovation and free expression. Others believe accountability is necessary. But here's the real question: if these restrictions backfire—driving users to decentralized alternatives or damaging the EU's tech competitiveness—who bears the cost? Curious to hear different takes on this.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
15 Likes
Reward
15
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ser_aped.eth
· 52m ago
To put it simply, this move by the EU is just shooting themselves in the foot. Users have already started moving to Web3, and the stricter the regulations, the faster they leave.
View OriginalReply0
Lonely_Validator
· 1h ago
To be honest, the EU's move is a bit weak. Pushing people onto the blockchain actually makes it even harder to regulate.
View OriginalReply0
StablecoinAnxiety
· 1h ago
To put it bluntly, the EU's move is just shooting themselves in the foot—users have long been waiting to switch to Web3.
The EU's recent moves to tighten control over certain social platforms have sparked heated debate. When regulators step in to limit what can be said or shared, where's the line between public safety and overreach? Some argue that heavy-handed censorship sets a dangerous precedent, potentially stifling innovation and free expression. Others believe accountability is necessary. But here's the real question: if these restrictions backfire—driving users to decentralized alternatives or damaging the EU's tech competitiveness—who bears the cost? Curious to hear different takes on this.