> discussion-malware I've never heard this term and I like it. Relating software-of-mind to actual software can be a powerful intuition pump. Another useful m

> discussion-malware I've never heard this term and I like it. Relating software-of-mind to actual software can be a powerful intuition pump. Another useful metaphor (which we already deploy in software) is epidemiology and evolution. We already relate "memes" to "genes" (actually the distinction is very fuzzy, as genes are just information). We call parasitic replicants "viruses". We call things that have been co-opted by parasitic replicants "zombies". We already broadly recognize that some ideas are cognitohazardous, and that people can change for the worse on exposure, or even "die" in the sense that the person you knew can vanish forever. It's firmly in pop-culture - there's a whole Futurama episode where Bender finds religion and becomes deeply annoying. And yet, we are deeply reluctant to carry those lessons over, so strong is our aversion to free speech infringements. But our unwillingness to commit to some sort of principle of shutting down speech, means that sheer pragmatism is forcing us to silence people in an unprincipled way. I think we are long overdue for a new philosophy on this topic.