3 ms·

See, to me this is much more serious than the NSA collecting metadata. People are being jailed for speech.

ajross 13y ago
One person in a nation of 300 million was jailed for speech. And it was notable enough to drive a very sympathetic story in a comparatively high traffic (if cheesy) news outlet. That doesn't make it acceptable, but it's hardly the kind of systematic suppression of free expression you seem to be invoking. Context is important.
- pessimizer 13y ago
  >One person in a nation of 300 million was jailed for speech. More accurately, this article is about one person in a nation of 300 million who was jailed for speech, which gives us no grounds for assuming that either a large or small number of people are being prosecuted for things like this, other than the number is greater than one. It's a systematic problem that portions of the system feel free to jail for pretty innocuous speech. How about Cameron D'Ambrosio last month, or the unknown number that were not "notable enough"? D'Ambrosio only got out of jail because the grand jury refused to indict, not because prosecutors weren't willing to prosecute.
- speeder 13y ago
  This article talks about one person, there is others... Beside whistleblowers, there is also that dude that defended Al Quaeda (he only spoke in favour of Al Quaeda), and some others I don't particularly remember now...
- Homunculiheaded 13y ago
  There's also this first act from the "Right to Remain Silent" from This American Life [0] and this story [1] that pmorici posted. So that's 3 now without actually looking hard at all. 0. http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/transcript http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/t... 1. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/teen-jailed-for-terror-rap/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/teen-jailed-for-ter...
- bargl 13y ago
  I think we have to wait for this to play out to see how it actually reflects on our culture. If he is released and the people who broke his right to free speech are punished then we don't have a problem. But even one case like this can be the foundation for hundreds more. One is unacceptable.
pessimizer 13y ago
To me it's most terrifying that both government surveillance and speech prosecutions are increasing at the same time.
pdog 13y ago
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with it, but there is the concept that "even the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic."
- Homunculiheaded 13y ago
  In this specific case I think the analog to shouting fire in a a theater here would be to actually call in a bomb threat (or other threats). Which I believe the vast majority of HNers will agree should be a crime. I'm honestly confused how people can see the situation described in the article as anything other than insane.
Torgo 13y ago
They both chill free speech.
adventured 13y ago
They both stem from the same disease that's killing America: the increasingly absolute power of the state, and the obvious outcomes from that.

One person in a nation of 300 million was jailed for speech. And it was notable enough to drive a very sympathetic story in a comparatively high traffic (if cheesy) news outlet. That doesn't make it acceptable, but it's hardly the kind of systematic suppression of free expression you seem to be invoking. Context is important.

pessimizer 13y ago
>One person in a nation of 300 million was jailed for speech. More accurately, this article is about one person in a nation of 300 million who was jailed for speech, which gives us no grounds for assuming that either a large or small number of people are being prosecuted for things like this, other than the number is greater than one. It's a systematic problem that portions of the system feel free to jail for pretty innocuous speech. How about Cameron D'Ambrosio last month, or the unknown number that were not "notable enough"? D'Ambrosio only got out of jail because the grand jury refused to indict, not because prosecutors weren't willing to prosecute.
speeder 13y ago
This article talks about one person, there is others... Beside whistleblowers, there is also that dude that defended Al Quaeda (he only spoke in favour of Al Quaeda), and some others I don't particularly remember now...
Homunculiheaded 13y ago
There's also this first act from the "Right to Remain Silent" from This American Life [0] and this story [1] that pmorici posted. So that's 3 now without actually looking hard at all. 0. http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/transcript http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/t... 1. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/teen-jailed-for-terror-rap/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/teen-jailed-for-ter...
bargl 13y ago
I think we have to wait for this to play out to see how it actually reflects on our culture. If he is released and the people who broke his right to free speech are punished then we don't have a problem. But even one case like this can be the foundation for hundreds more. One is unacceptable.

pessimizer 13y ago

To me it's most terrifying that both government surveillance and speech prosecutions are increasing at the same time.

pdog 13y ago

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with it, but there is the concept that "even the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic."

Homunculiheaded 13y ago
In this specific case I think the analog to shouting fire in a a theater here would be to actually call in a bomb threat (or other threats). Which I believe the vast majority of HNers will agree should be a crime. I'm honestly confused how people can see the situation described in the article as anything other than insane.

Torgo 13y ago

They both chill free speech.

adventured 13y ago

They both stem from the same disease that's killing America: the increasingly absolute power of the state, and the obvious outcomes from that.