Which is why (IMHO) privacy must trump non-personal information monopolies: because we simply can't have both. The right to pursue a living is meaningless witho

Which is why (IMHO) privacy must trump non-personal information monopolies: because we simply can't have both. The right to pursue a living is meaningless without the right to live. The all-or-nothing nature of communication, as you note, is palpable and it is pressing us to preserve those monopolies and give up our rights to privacy and physical safety in order to go on doing business as usual. However well-intentioned, copyright and other "disembodied" (state-owned, or corporate-owned, etc) idea-monopolies have become arguments against privacy and basic physical rights... So, what will it be: today's copyright (or national security, and so on), or tomorrow's freedom-of-thought? Do you prefer group-rights or individual rights? If groups, the information flows too fast to permit independent though. If you prefer individuality, the speed of communication is obviating the need for groups and corporations and proxy-voting and governments that like to do things for us. There's still a way to go mind you, but I bet this is what a fetus feels like when it's cells are multiplying and eventually one mind emerges (or things don't cooperate, and one doesn't), all while the autonomic systems emerge enslaved to their rhythms, all the way down to the cells that are just trying to take the bus back to the lungs for a little fresh air on their breaks... Wait, what was I saying? Oh yeah, so who's ready for the hive-mind?