4 ms·
Even if I agreed with your premise that humans can’t be trusted to talk to one another, what makes you think that those same humans can then somehow be trusted
by commandlinefan 7y ago
Even if I agreed with your premise that humans can’t be trusted to talk to one another, what makes you think that those same humans can then somehow be trusted to determine when other humans can safely talk to one another?
- abrahamepton 7y agoThe premise is not, even remotely, "humans can't be trusted to talk to one another" but rather, "humans have spent our entire existence as a species talking to each other in a different way than we have begun to in the last two decades." The alternative to trusting humans is not to just leave ourselves open to the vagaries of the winds, or whatever, but to allow malicious actors to take advantage of an unregulated medium to pursue their own interests. Not sure why anyone should think that's a better outcome.
- antepodius 7y agoIf the alternative requires the construction of a colossal bureaucracy that empowers bad actors in a way that causes even more harm.