Self-censorship is the greatest danger. The internet tends to make our statements permanent (or capable of a permanence we cannot control). Most intelligent peo

Self-censorship is the greatest danger. The internet tends to make our statements permanent (or capable of a permanence we cannot control). Most intelligent people will not want to spend the remainder of their lives defending and explaining something they said which they may or may not believe in any longer or which is taken out of context or which may later become actually dangerous to their livelihood, their family and so on. Even for people that are relatively non-conformist this places a much higher burden on controversial speech. In other words it costs more to say something controversial. Therefore, less people say it. Therefore the pool of people capable of hearing it and repeating it shrinks. The internet I think, therefore, does by its nature (at present) ensure greater homogeneity of thought, despite the fact that it has vastly increased the overall space and speed of discourse. I don't see any obvious solution, except more individuals accepting the burden of saying things they know will cause them difficulty. At the same time those individuals must also lend an ear to the ideas they least like to hear. Which, let's face it, sounds like a dreary pain in the ass.