Pointing out that WhatsApp was used to spread misinformation before Brazilian elections under the header “Ethical issues with WhatsApp” seems weird to me.
According to the Guardian article[0] this article uses as a source, WhatsApp has had updates to limit the number of times messages can be forwarded. But there’s obviously a limit to what can be done because the chats are e2e encrypted.
What does the author want from WhatsApp? Reading messages and blocking them if they don’t pass Meta’s moral guidelines is the opposite of want you’d want from your private chats and I don’t see any other way to effectively combat spreading misinformation.
And is there any indication that Signal would prevent situations like this if it gets more widely used?
According to the Guardian article[0] this article uses as a source, WhatsApp has had updates to limit the number of times messages can be forwarded. But there’s obviously a limit to what can be done because the chats are e2e encrypted.
What does the author want from WhatsApp? Reading messages and blocking them if they don’t pass Meta’s moral guidelines is the opposite of want you’d want from your private chats and I don’t see any other way to effectively combat spreading misinformation.
And is there any indication that Signal would prevent situations like this if it gets more widely used?
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/30/whatsapp-fake-...