|
|
|
|
|
by stego-tech
386 days ago
|
|
Then maybe don’t put critical services on the open internet. I know most tech people would balk at such a possibility, but the status quo isn’t really compatible with either long-term goal: * If we want the internet to be a place of anonymity and free speech, then we shouldn’t be putting critical services on the public internet - or we need to stop using intermediaries like Cloudflare where a single court order could disrupt legal services OR * If we want critical services online and widely available, then verifiable identity is a must from the outset, such that these sorts of blocks can be highly targeted when enforced. Piracy exists between those two forces: an anonymous internet would be rife with piracy, while an authenticated internet would see minimal amounts of it because it’s so easily eradicated. Coexistence of both worked because the internet was optional, which is no longer the case. But nobody wants to talk about that, I find. Everyone wants the status quo to continue unabated forever, because it’s familiar. Familiarity does not mean permanent, though. |
|
It's more than just familiarity. It's what works.
If someone had a significantly better alternative I think the world would jump on it. But many have tried to disrupt this equilibrium and failed.