3 ms·

I wasn't making any assumptions about your nationality; it seems irrelevant regarding the truth or falsity of an idea. Like different countries responding to CO

I wasn't making any assumptions about your nationality; it seems irrelevant regarding the truth or falsity of an idea. Like different countries responding to COVID: truth doesn't really care how special the US/Sweden/Japan/wherever thinks they are. I read your link but I don't understand the point that the Brookings institution is trying to make about the context of the quote. I'm open minded, but miss the point they are making; perhaps because it's a transcribed interview. Nevertheless: quotes are nice because they distill an idea down to an elemental form. They might be wise or they might be dumb, but the simple idea expressed in the phrase (regardless of who uttered it, or what they meant at the time) seems wise to me as we consider the tradeoffs between a walled garden vis-a-vis privacy.

coldtea 6y ago
>I wasn't making any assumptions about your nationality; it seems irrelevant regarding the truth or falsity of an idea. Yes, but it's not irrelevant regarding to the propensity of certain nationals to consider some ideas true (or "consider them to be self-evident" - see what I did here?), and to put them forward at any opportunity. >Nevertheless: quotes are nice because they distill an idea down to an elemental form. They might be wise or they might be dumb, but the simple idea expressed in the phrase (regardless of who uttered it, or what they meant at the time) seems wise to me as we consider the tradeoffs between a walled garden vis-a-vis privacy. Well, the idea is: never trade essential liberties for temporary safety, you'll lose both. To which I answer: safety is always temporary, what's an "essential libery" is debatable, and we must voluntarily (and ocassionally involuntarily) give up essential liberties all the time to get the temporary safety and other goodies afforded by society.

coldtea 6y ago

>I wasn't making any assumptions about your nationality; it seems irrelevant regarding the truth or falsity of an idea. Yes, but it's not irrelevant regarding to the propensity of certain nationals to consider some ideas true (or "consider them to be self-evident" - see what I did here?), and to put them forward at any opportunity. >Nevertheless: quotes are nice because they distill an idea down to an elemental form. They might be wise or they might be dumb, but the simple idea expressed in the phrase (regardless of who uttered it, or what they meant at the time) seems wise to me as we consider the tradeoffs between a walled garden vis-a-vis privacy. Well, the idea is: never trade essential liberties for temporary safety, you'll lose both. To which I answer: safety is always temporary, what's an "essential libery" is debatable, and we must voluntarily (and ocassionally involuntarily) give up essential liberties all the time to get the temporary safety and other goodies afforded by society.