4 ms·
I’m more interested in how you’d restrict speech, in a way that isn’t ineffective or corrupted. Right now I think that free speech, like decentralization, shou
by armchairhacker 10mo ago
I’m more interested in how you’d restrict speech, in a way that isn’t ineffective or corrupted.
Right now I think that free speech, like decentralization, should exist as a safety net. So most people use centralized platforms where bad content (e.g. this) is censored, but the open internet still exists, if only to keep the centralized platforms in line by providing alternatives if they degrade (e.g. if government propaganda gets so bad that it clearly and significantly contradicts people’s beliefs and real-life experiences).
- sznio 10mo agono expectation of free speech if you use modern technology. free speech over the mail, phone, in writing, in books, in newspapers, in radio, in television, in shouting on the street but not on the internet. it's just irresponsible to allow someone to both reach millions of individuals, and be anonymous. either one, or the other.