|
|
|
|
|
|
by vy8vWJlco
5234 days ago
|
|
|
It looks like it's becoming a "status quo" document because, for the sake of credibility, noone wants to stand up on copyright, privacy, censorship, and human rights. The "what if someone posts illegal content!?" questions dominate, just like in the Reddit meshnet plan. We've been having this debate about the Internet for years and decades later, we're still not willing to stand up for the bad speech to save the good speech. (You can't have one without the other -- that's what that amendment was about.) Yes I think it's that black or white.... Iran has shown us it IS possible to go back to the stone age, and the scary part is, the US and Canada BOTH have a 1984 bill in play as I write. We've come a long way in terms of technology, but people are less willing to stand up for the free flow of information than ever. We are crawling back into Plato's cave. As difficult as some information can be (and it's strictly that -- information -- bits -- not murder, or rape, or worse; not a physical act but merely the vapors of physical acts), I think I'd rather have the truth and an open sky than the comfort of a lie. I'm more afraid of a world without Wikileaks than one with Wikileaks. |
|
|
What bills are you referring to, specifically?