| This Tolerance Paradox is something I’ve been discussing lately with family and friends, but was having a hard time articulating. Thanks for the link. I see tons of parallels with today’s world, on both sides of the spectrum (left/right, woke/unwoke etc). Like, I do agree that most speech should be free and that dark humour and unpopular ideas and whatnot should be allowed even if you or a portion of the population don’t like it. However I also think you can’t just say whatever you want and hide behind that free speech protection, because that opens the door to really nasty stuff that the human species has lived through. But where’s the line? That comedian arrested in the UK for a tweet[0], for instance. Do I agree? No. Do I think it was an intolerant thing to say from my POV? Yes. Do I think it is in fact inciting violence and deserves arrest? No. On the other hand, you have people preaching white supremacy and talking about inferior races. We know where that led us. So where’s the line? Same thing applies for these “regulated” surveillances. CSAM sounds like a good reason, but the same tools can be used to limit or monitor other speeches and behaviors. (Not to get into the debate of effectiveness, since bypassing is doable if you really want to). I don’t have an answer, and I don’t think there is a clear line to be drawn. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c07p7v2nn8mo.amp |