2 ms·

> Are there circumstances when something should be banned, and how does that work on a blockchain? My answer is No. The "genuinely harmful content" is minimal

> Are there circumstances when something should be banned, and how does that work on a blockchain? My answer is No. The "genuinely harmful content" is minimally harmful compared to the damage censorship can do. The problem is always with people being dicks, not the information. E.g. a jilted lover posting porn videoes of an ex is only a problem because the lover will deliberately attempt to show them to the ex and the ex's social contacts (and even that is only harmful because some people are judgemental bastards. Yes, some people like scat, get over it), so target the lover with harassment charges rather than making the information distribution illegal. I'm a bit of a freedom of information purist, I think a world with 0 censorship would be better than the current one, as the censors will always be tempted to censor more and more things to advance their interests. The maximum badness from zero censorship is much much lower than the maximum badness with censorship.

poutrathor 5y ago
what is lacking in your view is empathy. It seems you don't understand what it is to be the victim, for no good damn fault of you. Moreover in your 'solution', once the videos have leaked on-line to fulfil the ex-lover revenge, it will never be taken out. Fast forward 10 years later, the ex-lover has served its sentence, the victim moved to another place, another job, every thing is forgotten. At their work, they got into a heated debate about any topic. The adversarial debater, seeing red, searched the web, find the video and broadcast to everybody. There might be regrets the second after sending, but it's too late, *once again* It's not about people being dicks it's about information as weapons laying around forever. Humans have built-in forgetness but modern days tech does not. Since we are evolving at nature rate, technology must be rein in from time to time.
- concordDance 5y ago
  I admit I do struggle to understand that type of victimhood. Probably because my social circle would not care about whatever obscure fetishes I have unless it's kiddy diddling, nor would most even want to see my sex tape (and I'd struggle to care if they had). However, people are quite capable of being very unpleasant to eachother without sex videos, if it wasn't that the person seeing red would have done something else (keyed car, sabotage, malicious lies... plenty of options). Regardless they should be disciplined, probably fired outright.

poutrathor 5y ago

what is lacking in your view is empathy. It seems you don't understand what it is to be the victim, for no good damn fault of you. Moreover in your 'solution', once the videos have leaked on-line to fulfil the ex-lover revenge, it will never be taken out. Fast forward 10 years later, the ex-lover has served its sentence, the victim moved to another place, another job, every thing is forgotten. At their work, they got into a heated debate about any topic. The adversarial debater, seeing red, searched the web, find the video and broadcast to everybody. There might be regrets the second after sending, but it's too late, *once again* It's not about people being dicks it's about information as weapons laying around forever. Humans have built-in forgetness but modern days tech does not. Since we are evolving at nature rate, technology must be rein in from time to time.

concordDance 5y ago
I admit I do struggle to understand that type of victimhood. Probably because my social circle would not care about whatever obscure fetishes I have unless it's kiddy diddling, nor would most even want to see my sex tape (and I'd struggle to care if they had). However, people are quite capable of being very unpleasant to eachother without sex videos, if it wasn't that the person seeing red would have done something else (keyed car, sabotage, malicious lies... plenty of options). Regardless they should be disciplined, probably fired outright.