[chrisco255]

> It should be noted that he is less sanguine about letting misinformation run free when he is complaining about inaccurate press coverage of cryptocurrency. (Pretty much like anyone who complains about inaccurate press coverage, honestly.) It's always easier to be sanguine about someone else's misinformation that affects other people.

How can you conflate someone expressing an opinion on their "micro-blog" to their followers who have opted in to hear such opinions with the idea of having tweets arbitrarily interjected with "expert opinions".

Even though Vitalik is one of the world's experts on crypto and cryptocurrency and blockchain systems, he would never suggest to be given the authority to directly annotate incorrect tweets about crypto with his own expert opinion. It's pretentious to believe that such a thing is desirable or could ever be neutral. Such a system is ALWAYS capturable and corruptible. So of course it's risky. That's why free speech being a social and cultural value is as important as it being a law for governments to respect. Meaningless is the law if a culture is too prudish or too conforming to begin with.

If Vitalik wishes to persuade people away from bad opinions about crypto, doing so at his leisure on his own micro-blog or regular blog is certainly a preferable option to acting as some sort of Minister of Truth.