3 ms·

I think knowledge is a human right. Free people are able to go outside and start dropping rocks from different heights to start deriving physics. Or study wildl

by gretch 3y ago

I think knowledge is a human right. Free people are able to go outside and start dropping rocks from different heights to start deriving physics. Or study wildlife for biology knowledge. That's not what this article is talking about though. This article is attempting to conflate the right to knowledge with a right to access publications that another party produced and put behind a pay wall. Which is also different than the 3rd discussion of "if it is tax funded, shouldn't it be available to the general public?".

jrflowers 3y ago
> Free people are able to go outside and start dropping rocks from different heights to start deriving physics. Or study wildlife for biology knowledge. Thank you for clarifying this. I could see how a reasonable person could easily assume that Elbakyan is in fact talking about the prohibition of dropping rocks without going through an elaborate bit of mental gymnastics for a pedantic language gotcha in order to arrive at such an interpretation.
- gretch 3y ago
  I don't know if you're trying to be sarcastic or what, but it's as worth enshrining as the "freedom of speech". You could easily say "lol what, yOu'RE NoT aLLoWed to Talk?", but what it actually means is that the government can't persecute you based on what you say. You should note that many authorities and governments in the past have absolutely punished the gathering of scientific knowledge, e.g. in a theology.
  - jrflowers 3y ago
    > You could easily say "lol what, yOu'RE NoT aLLoWed to Talk?", but what it actually means is that the government can't persecute you based on what you say. This is a good point. A person can mention freedom of speech and another person can respond in intentional misunderstanding in order to make a joke or to seem intelligent. Like for example, someone can see an article written by the creator of Sci-Hub on a very specific topic and bring up rocks.
    - gretch 3y ago
      Yes well unfortunately that author decided to over generalize their own argument into “Access to knowledge is a human right.” That indeed is the “specific topic” isn’t it?

by gretch 3y ago

jrflowers 3y ago

> Free people are able to go outside and start dropping rocks from different heights to start deriving physics. Or study wildlife for biology knowledge. Thank you for clarifying this. I could see how a reasonable person could easily assume that Elbakyan is in fact talking about the prohibition of dropping rocks without going through an elaborate bit of mental gymnastics for a pedantic language gotcha in order to arrive at such an interpretation.

gretch 3y ago
I don't know if you're trying to be sarcastic or what, but it's as worth enshrining as the "freedom of speech". You could easily say "lol what, yOu'RE NoT aLLoWed to Talk?", but what it actually means is that the government can't persecute you based on what you say. You should note that many authorities and governments in the past have absolutely punished the gathering of scientific knowledge, e.g. in a theology.
- jrflowers 3y ago
  > You could easily say "lol what, yOu'RE NoT aLLoWed to Talk?", but what it actually means is that the government can't persecute you based on what you say. This is a good point. A person can mention freedom of speech and another person can respond in intentional misunderstanding in order to make a joke or to seem intelligent. Like for example, someone can see an article written by the creator of Sci-Hub on a very specific topic and bring up rocks.
  - gretch 3y ago
    Yes well unfortunately that author decided to over generalize their own argument into “Access to knowledge is a human right.” That indeed is the “specific topic” isn’t it?