[lone-commenter]

> The argument for censorship against stupidity assumes exactly that, that the majority of people are stupid which they are not.

It's not censorship against stupidity. It's censorship against bullshitters who spread medical misinformation that may put people in danger; factually untenable opinions, expressed in an assertive manner, in a context which seems authoritative to the layperson.

Nobody says the majority is stupid, nor it is relevant. Protecting a minority is as good an excuse as it is protecting the majority, don't you think?

[smaryjerry]

My point was that we should and can understand the difference between sources of bad information and good information, this is and should be taught in schools. I don’t think we should protect the minority by limiting everyone. We could make a safety vs security argument but in my opinion we should protect children only and allow adults to make stupid mistakes. This is why we have drinking age, smoking age and drivers license ages. At some point we need to assume a level of intelligence in the population and in accordance allow freedom to make mistakes.