Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Terretta 2374 days ago
That only works if you think free speech is always good.

Should we let people yell fire in a crowded theater?

Is freedom from fear a fundamental right? How fundamental?

Privacy yields to safety as free speech yields to safety...

For some time now, we’re no longer designing protections from probable harm, but theater abating improbable fears.

2 comments

Free speech, in the US context, usually relates to the 1st Amendment, which precludes _govt_ censorship.

You can yell 'fire' in a crowded theater; if there is indeed a fire, it's fine — you're trying to help alert people to a dangerous situation. If there is not, and you cause a panic that results in injury to others, you could (should imo) be liable.

The US Supreme Court has a litmus test around when the line is crossed. Logically, there must be a balance to ensure one's rights do not infringe on another's, and when there is conflict, how to resolve it. In the case of party A threatening violence on party B, the line is if there is an imminent threat ('fighting words' — inciting an immediate attack), A is in the wrong. Otherwise, no 1A issue. It's much more difficult to prove in the case of stochastic speech targeting a person or group (eg Said before an audience: '$target is bad. Would be a shame if something happened to $target.' Implying someone in earshot should take care of it.).

I also want to highlight that free speech doesn't mean free of consequence — it only limits govt censorship. You can say what you want, but you may: incur financial loses (eg job or contract losses, boycotts), be ridiculed or shamed (ie become a pariah), be denied access to private properties / venues / events / forums (including web sites such as Twitter or Facebook), etc.

https://xkcd.com/1357/

Yes to all of those, freedom of speech above all.