6 ms·

> We've given up on protecting our freedoms... Wow, putting it like that makes me realize it's just part of the larger societal trend toward authoritarianism.

> We've given up on protecting our freedoms... Wow, putting it like that makes me realize it's just part of the larger societal trend toward authoritarianism. I guess this is one of those 'Stallman was right' moments.

TeMPOraL 6y ago
It is - in fact, it's kind of the main thing Stallman was writing about all these years. It didn't click for me until few years ago; as a young programmer, I was thinking in terms of "good vs. evil", then "idealists vs. pragmatists", which are wrong frames of mind. Once I learned to think in terms of market incentives, Stallman's arguments became somewhat obvious. RE the wider trend toward authoritarianism, I'm not yet sure I see it clearly, at least outside the privacy space. But I do feel trends towards taking away end-user control and turning everything into a service, which are very much market-driven, though perhaps they also are a subset of authoritarianism.
- nbzso 6y ago
  You are on to something important here:) If you want to know how we are will be "happy by owning nothing" read this "masterpiece" of socialized corporatism https://www.amazon.co.uk/COVID-19-Great-Reset-Klaus-Schwab/dp/2940631123 https://www.amazon.co.uk/COVID-19-Great-Reset-Klaus-Schwab/d... .
- freedomben 6y ago
  Just the sheer number of people calling for Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, etc to censor others is remarkable to me. I came of age during a time when we on the left believed fiercely in personal freedoms, especially freedom of speech. We would blast music that would say things like, "F--k you I won't do what you tell me." [1] Now the same left I loved can't erupt in protest fast enough when social media aren't censoring idiots. We used to all know that censoring of anybody was wrong, but also that it didn't work. Censoring was what corporations and authoritarian states did to people, and we hated it. That's just one example of the change people have gone through. [1] https://genius.com/Rage-against-the-machine-killing-in-the-name-lyrics https://genius.com/Rage-against-the-machine-killing-in-the-n...
  - post_below 6y ago
    I see freedom of speech as a right that should be preserved at almost all costs. And also, step back a bit and look at the state of digitally distributed disinformation. We've elected politicians that look like characters from an absurdist satire, loony conspiracy theories are going mainstream, climate change isn't real, the pandemic is a lie, a significant percentage of the US population thinks the presidental election was completely fraudulent... and so on. Misinformation is a problem that genuinely threatens society. I'd love to think that if you let people figure things out for themselves they'll eventually manage it. That they'll eventually stop believing wild claims based on no evidence. But we don't have time to test that theory. Should the big platforms have the power over the digital public square that they do? Definitely not. But they do have it. Pressuring them to deal with misinformation is something I completely support. The alternative is tech illiterate legislation because the misinformation problem isn't going to go away on it's own.
    - artificialLimbs 6y ago
      "Misinformation is a problem that genuinely threatens society." Misinformation is magnitudes of order less dangerous than restricting free speech. The antidote to bad speech is more (hopefully good) speech, not less speech. I like to be able to spot the idiots and know who they are and where they stand, not to put them underground where they inevitably fester into violence in their bubbles.
      - XorNot 6y ago
        This is laughable. If propaganda and advertising don't work, then why is everyone so invested in creating it?
        pitay 6y ago
        This is laughable. If propaganda and advertising don't work, then why is everyone so invested in creating it? The people creating propaganda are also interested in enforcing censorship if they are in the position to do so. Propaganda and censorship work far better together than individually for groups that want to brainwash society into certain beliefs.

TeMPOraL 6y ago

It is - in fact, it's kind of the main thing Stallman was writing about all these years. It didn't click for me until few years ago; as a young programmer, I was thinking in terms of "good vs. evil", then "idealists vs. pragmatists", which are wrong frames of mind. Once I learned to think in terms of market incentives, Stallman's arguments became somewhat obvious. RE the wider trend toward authoritarianism, I'm not yet sure I see it clearly, at least outside the privacy space. But I do feel trends towards taking away end-user control and turning everything into a service, which are very much market-driven, though perhaps they also are a subset of authoritarianism.

nbzso 6y ago
You are on to something important here:) If you want to know how we are will be "happy by owning nothing" read this "masterpiece" of socialized corporatism https://www.amazon.co.uk/COVID-19-Great-Reset-Klaus-Schwab/dp/2940631123 https://www.amazon.co.uk/COVID-19-Great-Reset-Klaus-Schwab/d... .
freedomben 6y ago
Just the sheer number of people calling for Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, etc to censor others is remarkable to me. I came of age during a time when we on the left believed fiercely in personal freedoms, especially freedom of speech. We would blast music that would say things like, "F--k you I won't do what you tell me." [1] Now the same left I loved can't erupt in protest fast enough when social media aren't censoring idiots. We used to all know that censoring of anybody was wrong, but also that it didn't work. Censoring was what corporations and authoritarian states did to people, and we hated it. That's just one example of the change people have gone through. [1] https://genius.com/Rage-against-the-machine-killing-in-the-name-lyrics https://genius.com/Rage-against-the-machine-killing-in-the-n...
- post_below 6y ago
  I see freedom of speech as a right that should be preserved at almost all costs. And also, step back a bit and look at the state of digitally distributed disinformation. We've elected politicians that look like characters from an absurdist satire, loony conspiracy theories are going mainstream, climate change isn't real, the pandemic is a lie, a significant percentage of the US population thinks the presidental election was completely fraudulent... and so on. Misinformation is a problem that genuinely threatens society. I'd love to think that if you let people figure things out for themselves they'll eventually manage it. That they'll eventually stop believing wild claims based on no evidence. But we don't have time to test that theory. Should the big platforms have the power over the digital public square that they do? Definitely not. But they do have it. Pressuring them to deal with misinformation is something I completely support. The alternative is tech illiterate legislation because the misinformation problem isn't going to go away on it's own.
  - artificialLimbs 6y ago
    "Misinformation is a problem that genuinely threatens society." Misinformation is magnitudes of order less dangerous than restricting free speech. The antidote to bad speech is more (hopefully good) speech, not less speech. I like to be able to spot the idiots and know who they are and where they stand, not to put them underground where they inevitably fester into violence in their bubbles.
    - XorNot 6y ago
      This is laughable. If propaganda and advertising don't work, then why is everyone so invested in creating it?
      - pitay 6y ago
        This is laughable. If propaganda and advertising don't work, then why is everyone so invested in creating it? The people creating propaganda are also interested in enforcing censorship if they are in the position to do so. Propaganda and censorship work far better together than individually for groups that want to brainwash society into certain beliefs.