That's not inherently true. If there were a way to reliably destroy all the sock puppets, we should, and the world would be better off. For instance, reliable bot detection, or mechanisms by which major social networks could detect and prohibit bot-like activity that isn't labeled as such.

charge one penny for every post. most people can afford it. bots become less cost effective and you'd be able to trace the source of funds.

Even if they could afford it, they won't. The UX friction of charging money would send engagement off a cliff, even if the nominal charge was $0.

Only half joking, I feel like the majority of comments on the internet are garbage and not worth the time to read, and increasing friction with a nominal charge isn't necessarily a terrible thing.

It's a good thing for most people, just not the "platforms" trying to show growth.

that's why it should be mandated by law for national security reasons!

This is a nice idea, but we already know that organized criminals and state actors have no problem spending money to make money (or influence public opinion).

On top of that, social media isn't like email where a potential transaction fee increases the cost per person reached - a single post on a hot topic could get millions of views.

I don't think you understand the Devil's Advocate rhetorical device. It's not just a thing you say before you state a morally reprehensible opinion you hold.

Imo there's a difference between propaganda promoting functioning democracy and propaganda promoting conservative-at-best authoritarianism.

Why stop there? Send missiles! Heck, send bioweapons and dirty bombs. It might not be ethical but if others doing it we might as well join 'em.

(This is sarcasm. I don't want to live in this world.)

We do.