3 ms·
>>protecting the safety of public employees and ensuring research that benefits the public can proceed without risk of violence >By that logic, wouldn't you co
by fsckboy 3y ago
>>protecting the safety of public employees and ensuring research that benefits the public can proceed without risk of violence
>By that logic, wouldn't you conclude you should censor anything that causes people to protest in the streets?
no, only in cases where you're ensuring research that benefits the public, and also ensuring that things that are legal can proceed without risk of violence. If the photos were to lead only to petition signing, that would be a different matter.
now, you can be cynical about things "the authorities say", and you can be worked up about monkeys and feel that their lives are equal to human lives; but just going on what the words mean, I don't think your interpretation is correct.
- perihelions 3y ago- "If the photos were to lead only to petition signing, that would be a different matter." What you're describing is a heckler's veto: denying the right of the public to participate civically, out of a fear response to a fringe minority.
- 20after4 3y agoIt's a pretty big assumption that this research benefits the public. It sounds like the results of said research remain the proprietary property of Neuralink and that's not what I would call a public benefit.