4 ms·
When any society (and the web is a society) starts to sacrifice the freedom for its citizens to act in public if they so choose in the name of "protecting them"
by empressplay 12y ago
When any society (and the web is a society) starts to sacrifice the freedom for its citizens to act in public if they so choose in the name of "protecting them" from the poor behaviour of a few bad actors, it becomes awfully difficult to characterise that society as "free".
- icebraining 12y agoHow is deprecating a protocol "sacrificing freedom"? Such hyperbole.
- onion2k 12y ago"My choice to do something is a freedom that cannot be taken from me" is the same sort of argument people use to carry assault rifles around shopping centres. Sometimes you should be willing to give up a freedom if the result is a benefit for the whole of society, even if you happen to like or benefit from the status quo. That's part of being a member of humanity (or at least, it should be).
- userbinator 12y ago...especially if that protection involves authorisation by centralised entities. I would be far more supportive of ubiquitous encryption if it was controlled by the users. Notice how encryption which is under control of the user (mobile device encryption, cryptocurrencies, full-disk encryption, self-signed certificates) is seen as a threat, while systems like the SSL CA model where governments could more easily obtain keys if they wanted to, are not? "Those who give up freedom for security deserve neither."