4 ms·
While I agree with your premise of a neutral organisation free speech doesn't work. It never has and never will. The internet has proven that a lawless space sh
by estaseuropano 6y ago
While I agree with your premise of a neutral organisation free speech doesn't work. It never has and never will. The internet has proven that a lawless space should not be tolerated. Nazis, Islamism, rape porn, child abuse, slave sales, hitmen, ... You don't want the mob to rule the web.
The question would then be if nations can find some common ground of what is unacceptable (so e.g. insulting the king of Thailand shouldn't get your site deleted) or there needs to be another system to enable global takedowns.
- BlueTemplar 6y agoSorry, maybe I should have said "The (regular) Web" since that's what we are talking about. AFAIK a lot of these not-web/"dark web"(?)–sites are available on the Internet via tools like Freenet (and Tor?) > The question would then be if nations can find some common ground of what is unacceptable This is just not going to happen. There are 195 countries in the world. They can't even agree on whether women have the same rights as men or whether it is legal to draw images of the Muslim prophet (So, depending on what you mean by the term, "Islamism" might just be the legal system of some countries, as 35 of them apply more or less the Sharia). Or another example : the USA is supposed to be a single country, yet in some of its states sex between full blown adults and teenagers of a certain age is legal, while in others a teenager becomes a sex offender by merely owning photos of him/herself naked ! (And how would you deal with potential new countries that might not agree to the previous 'common ground' ?)