2025-12-05 19:25:25

Brussels just hit a major social platform with over $140 million in fines, citing violations related to hate speech and misinformation under their Digital Services Act.

But here's the real question: who gets to decide what counts as "misinformation"? When regulators claim they're protecting users, are they actually protecting free speech—or just expanding their control over digital discourse?

This debate isn't new to Web3 folks. Decentralized platforms have long argued that centralized authorities shouldn't dictate what ideas get amplified or suppressed. Whether it's social media, crypto forums, or blockchain governance—the tension between safety and censorship keeps resurfacing.

The fight for open dialogue continues. And in a world moving toward decentralization, these battles matter more than ever.

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.

11 Likes

Reward
11
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ChainPoet

· 12-05 19:54

1. $1.14 billion fine? Brussels is really ruthless with this move, but I just don't get who gets to decide what counts as "disinformation." 2. So yeah, when regulators say they're protecting users... I think they just want to tighten their grip on discourse. Web3 saw through this long ago. 3. Haha, this is exactly why decentralized platforms have to exist—centralized entities have way too much power to decide. 4. History is repeating itself: whatever they can't control, they suppress under the name of "safety." Same old trick. 5. It's hilarious—on one hand, they claim to protect free speech, but on the other, they're throwing money at silencing people. Their logic is fighting itself. 6. So the EU wants to monopolize the narrative? No wonder more people are turning to decentralization. This approach won't work.

View OriginalReply0

SmartContractPlumber

· 12-05 19:53

A $140 million fine—at the end of the day, it's still about power expansion. Whoever defines what counts as misinformation gets to call the shots—that's just like the permission control issue in smart contracts: centralized power inevitably leads to vulnerabilities. --- This move by Brussels is no different from certain projects’ forced upgrades in the past—using “protection” as a pretext, but actually just tightening control. Can’t audit it? Then simply don’t let you know the rules. --- Censorship dressed up as “security” is basically the same as a reentrancy attack—the same vulnerability, unlimited permissions, and in the end, users’ freedoms are completely devoured. --- This is the real problem Web3 aims to solve. The permission model of centralized platforms is fundamentally flawed. Who gave them this power? --- Drop $140 million, and what’s the result? It’s still the same group deciding what can and can’t be said. I’ve seen this design pattern before—even formal verification can’t save this kind of structurally bad code. --- Yet another new integer overflow—when power has no checks, it just expands infinitely. Decentralization isn’t a gimmick; it’s a necessity.

View OriginalReply0

RektRecorder

· 12-05 19:51

ngl, the EU is really showing a hunger for power this time... Who gets to define what counts as "disinformation," anyway? --- A 140 million fine is basically just a way to tame public opinion, Web3 has seen through this game long ago. --- They keep claiming to protect users, but in reality, they're just monopolizing the right to speak. How is this any different from centralized censorship? --- The path toward decentralization is becoming more urgent than ever, otherwise we'll always be at the mercy of those who make the rules. --- Here we go again, every time it's "for security"... it's honestly so annoying. --- They talk a good game about protecting freedom of speech, but what they're really doing is suppressing dissent.

View OriginalReply0

ThreeHornBlasts

· 12-05 19:35

140 million fine? Brussels is really tough this time, but who gets to define what is misinformation? That's the real issue. Regulators say they want to protect users, but in reality, they just want to control the narrative. Web3 people have seen through this long ago. True freedom of speech exists on-chain; centralized platforms will have to give way sooner or later. This round is a crucial battle, and we're betting on our victory.

View OriginalReply0

DefiEngineerJack

· 12-05 19:34

well *actually* the irony here is brussels defining "misinformation" through centralized diktat while preaching about protecting discourse... sounds like formal verification of their logic would fail catastrophically lmao

Reply0

Trending TopicsView More
#JoinGrowthPointsDrawToWiniPhone17
281.25K Popularity
#DecemberMarketOutlook
80.13K Popularity
#PostonSquaretoEarn$50
14.41K Popularity
#LINKETFToLaunch
13.89K Popularity
#SharingMy100xToken
15.33K Popularity

Hot Gate FunView More

1
GHOSTGhost
MC:$3.82KHolders:5
1.29%
2
BONDXBONDX
MC:$3.58KHolders:3
0.00%
3
ICBGIceberg
MC:$10.16KHolders:13
25.77%
4
GBIRDGBird
MC:$3.53KHolders:1
0.00%
5
HLHuLi
MC:$3.53KHolders:1
0.00%

Sitemap