All good points. I think we have a lot of common ground. > I think most people just want technology to work for them instead of being used to constrain them.

All good points. I think we have a lot of common ground. > I think most people just want technology to work for them instead of being used to constrain them. People don't want constraints on them, sure, but they also don't want others to be unconstrained. "Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins." There's a balancing act. A system that is fully unconstrained is one that nobody will want to use, and/or facilitates behavior that is rightfully illegal. Let's take the spammer for instance. The opposite is true: people are perfectly happy to have technology and/or laws constrain the spammer. Those constraints on others is how the system works for them! > Laws don't fix much because no government can force other nations to comply. But also > When networks routinely misbehave we even build and share blacklists to exile them from our global community. Even if laws aren't being drafted by a government, they still happen organically. In this case, the ISP is acting as the government. A system where blacklisting can't happen isn't one that users will benefit from. Maybe it'd help if we started thinking of laws as another piece of technology. They're imperfect but serve a useful purpose.