[jlawson]

If authorities and those with power will apply a "cost" to you for doing an action, you do not have freedom to do that action. This is what freedom means.

Otherwise, what does it mean to you? Is your view that simply being physically capable of doing something means you're 'free' to do it?

Do you think people in North Korea have freedom of speech? After all, they can say whatever they like. It just comes with a cost (life in a labor camp).

[MichaelZuo]

Every possible human action has some cost. By that standard, 'free speech' has never existed and never will.

Which seems a bit silly, most people understand it to mean 'free' above a certain underlying threshold.

[im3w1l]

I dont think it's about threshold. It's about some consequences being ok to apply and some not being ok. But some of the ok ones may actually be bigger than some of the not-ok ones. For instance the love of your life breaking up with you. That's big. But ok. Or a $20 fine. That's small. But not ok.

[MichaelZuo]

A $20 fine for speech in a restricted area seems to be fine?

e.g. swear words in a kindergarten

[jlawson]

>Every possible human action has some cost.

Every possible human action does not have a punishment or a deterrent applied by those with power.

Freedom to do X means there's no punishment for doing X.

[MichaelZuo]

> Every possible human action does not have a punishment or a deterrent applied by those with power.

Since every living member of society has some non-zero amount, it would still be the case that free speech is practically impossible, if you set the bar too low. As the chances of that applying to at least 1 person out of 8 billion is pretty close to 100%.

So then the question is, how high exactly is the bar above zero?