"The ease of spreading information is also ease of spreading misinformation, and objection to censorship means there's no way to control spread of misinformatio

"The ease of spreading information is also ease of spreading misinformation, and objection to censorship means there's no way to control spread of misinformation." Censorship is non-consensual filtering of information (the mediator censors without consent of producer and consumer of information). This does not mean we can't control the spread of disinformation at all: by investing in education, and educating people about the importance of verification in general or formal verification in specific where possible, society could invest in infrastructure that helps in weeding out false information without twisting the consumers hand willy-nilly. As an example: without any need for censorship, if someone claims to give a proof for a theorem that supposedly follows from set.mm I can consent to censorship by voluntarily using MetaMath to verify it without even trying to understand the proof myself, and then discover that the proof is false, without some intermediary of information needing to censor anything for me. This is kind of the underlying theme behind the "blockchain craze", educating people the surprising applicability of logic/mathematics to the real world, even if it is very hard to design and prove the security of such systems, and to interpret the assumptions of such designs with desirable properties as being the requirements of infrastructure we need to build in order to enjoy such a decentralized commons.