3 ms·
How is this the conclusion you're reaching first? Does the unbelievable invasion of privacy and infringement on freedom of speech not raise your ire first and f
by olivierlacan 7y ago
How is this the conclusion you're reaching first? Does the unbelievable invasion of privacy and infringement on freedom of speech not raise your ire first and foremost?
Can you imagine being denied the right to travel or to temporarily relocate for school or work in a theoretically democratic country only to be denied entry because you or your friends expressed a personal, private, inconsequential and most likely fleeting opinion in the past?
- paggle 7y agoTheoretically democratic? Protections against democracy are one of the only reasons that the US still allows unskilled immigrants at all. The majority of the US population would overwhelmingly support the visa denial of a brown-skinned Muslim-sounding guy whose Facebook friends had posted suspect content.
- edejong 7y agoYour freedom is primarily based on the amount of power you decide to give to others. Due to social media, a tremendous asymmetry of power has been created in the hands of a few. This power is made visible in areas that are slightly outside of normal jurisdiction, such as at US border control. Our normal tendency is to want to regulate, but this can only be done to a limited extend. Too much regulation can stifle innovation or place too much power in the hands of the regulators. I'm not arguing against regulation. I am arguing that we should understand that our social media use (among others) comes at a very high cost to our freedoms. Proportional use, (proportional to our ability to regulate or our willingness to provide asymmetric information power) is warranted.