3 ms·
It can stifle speech and knowledge, whether intentionally or unintentionally, the consequences are the same. People are less likely to look up, or say, things
by heavyset_go 3y ago
It can stifle speech and knowledge, whether intentionally or unintentionally, the consequences are the same.
People are less likely to look up, or say, things in private that can get retroactively interpreted in the worst possible way by state actors who are looking for an easy arrest and/or conviction.
In the past, it was nearly impossible to round up everyone based on what they looked up in an encyclopedia, or on a map, in private. Your pursuit of knowledge wasn't limited by the very real threat of "Can just having curiosity about something land me in prison for terrorism/murder/arson/etc?"
It borders on thoughtcrime and feels like a fishing expedition to me.
> After a house is burned down, they are likely to ask everyone around if they saw or heard anything
To continue this analogy, simply asking is different than getting a warrant/subpoena for everyone in a neighborhood to search through records of their past speech to see if they said anything they deem suspicious.
- taeric 3y agoIf you had been yelling that you would be happy that someone's house burned down, I suspect you would be a suspect in the event that said house burned down. Does that mean we are stifling free speech that hopes harm on people? I can see some concern over this, but just not in this case. If it was, "all people that searched pyromancy" and that included people that were looking up fireworks, for example. Or if it was all people that looked at any house on redfin in that state. This was a fairly targeted search, all told. "Anyone been asking around about the victim?"
- godd2 3y agoI didn't know we became pyromancers on July 4th.
- heavyset_go 3y agoNobody is loudly and publicly expressing malice towards the victims of the arson, they privately, not loudly and publicly, Googled innocuous things that in no way express malice.
- taeric 3y agoMy point there is that we would fully expect publicly expressing malice to victims would get you on a suspect list. Heck, private expression of malice would likely get you added if they found out about it. Do we consider that a chilling effect of speech, that people are less likely to express malice to victims of a crime? This isn't even hypothetical in light of current world events.