3 ms·
Communication should be consensual. If I want to pre-emptively block some kind of content, or delegate such authority to some trusted third party, that's great.
by scarmig 7y ago
Communication should be consensual. If I want to pre-emptively block some kind of content, or delegate such authority to some trusted third party, that's great. It's what we do with ad blockers all the time, which are less controversial here for some reason than self-defined "safe spaces."
If anything, the ability to block content as opposed to individual users would lead to more exposure to new viewpoints. For instance, I think Rod Dreher has lots of interesting things to say. But it seems like a quarter of his posts are rants about trans people using bathrooms, which I just don't have time for. And as a result I mostly skip everything he writes, including the good stuff. But if we built tools that emphasized filtering on content instead of people, it would simultaneously let us get presented with arguments we're actually interested in having and also not prejudge content by association with other content that shares the same author.
- antepodius 7y agoWe accept ad blockers more readily because it's commonly accepted that ads are a different sort of speech, in an ethical way. It's not somebody telling you something; it's a machine trying to sell you something.