3 ms·

Great point. This is the root of so much of the challenge on the internet. There's a certain techno-utopianism libertarian view that says "absolutely, anybody

Great point. This is the root of so much of the challenge on the internet. There's a certain techno-utopianism libertarian view that says "absolutely, anybody should be able to say anything". And then there's a totalitarian authoritarian view that says "nobody should be able to post anything unless the Government authorises it". Most people exist somewhere in the middle, recognising there is a lot of nuance. It's impossible to draw a clear, consistent boundary. So instead we depend on human intervention, and often the humans get it wrong - but it's the best we have.

_8j50 4y ago
The key is accepting legitimacy of various authorities under their respective domains and architecting protocols that respect and delegate or federate decisions to them as needed.
soco 4y ago
What makes that "complete freedom" claim weird is also its (historical) novelty. Nobody was ever able to say everything without consequences, yet this utopia claims it's a forever right. Or maybe I understand them wrong, and they only defend the right to say bad stuff right before going to jail for it? Fine, but in this case there's no novelty at all, so it's probably not this.
croes 4y ago
I think one of the problems is reach. Back then your free speech had limted reach, nowadays the reach is globally.
rchaud 4y ago
> There's a certain techno-utopianism libertarian view that says "absolutely, anybody should be able to say anything". Scratch beneath the surface and it's usually BS. "Free speech" in tech seems to mostly be about who gets to be the gatekeeper, rather than removing gatekeepers altogether.
- egberts1 4y ago
  > > And then there's a totalitarian authoritarian view that says "nobody should be able to post anything unless the Government authorises it". We all know of millions of people trying out many apps in trying to escape their own living hell of “totalitarian authoritarians” and their gatekeepers, but I distress. So, it may be bovine excrement to you, but it is a divining principle in libertarians’ reflection of the current extreme views and probably should be a viable “canary-in-the-coalmine” test. “If you want to know who controls you, look at who you are not allowed to criticize.” - Voltaire

_8j50 4y ago

The key is accepting legitimacy of various authorities under their respective domains and architecting protocols that respect and delegate or federate decisions to them as needed.

soco 4y ago

What makes that "complete freedom" claim weird is also its (historical) novelty. Nobody was ever able to say everything without consequences, yet this utopia claims it's a forever right. Or maybe I understand them wrong, and they only defend the right to say bad stuff right before going to jail for it? Fine, but in this case there's no novelty at all, so it's probably not this.

croes 4y ago

I think one of the problems is reach. Back then your free speech had limted reach, nowadays the reach is globally.

rchaud 4y ago

> There's a certain techno-utopianism libertarian view that says "absolutely, anybody should be able to say anything". Scratch beneath the surface and it's usually BS. "Free speech" in tech seems to mostly be about who gets to be the gatekeeper, rather than removing gatekeepers altogether.

egberts1 4y ago
> > And then there's a totalitarian authoritarian view that says "nobody should be able to post anything unless the Government authorises it". We all know of millions of people trying out many apps in trying to escape their own living hell of “totalitarian authoritarians” and their gatekeepers, but I distress. So, it may be bovine excrement to you, but it is a divining principle in libertarians’ reflection of the current extreme views and probably should be a viable “canary-in-the-coalmine” test. “If you want to know who controls you, look at who you are not allowed to criticize.” - Voltaire