[crystal_revenge]

> We need laws for agents

I know politics is forbidden on HN, but, as non-politically as possible: institutional power has been collapsing across the board (especially in US, but elsewhere as well) as wealthy individuals yield increasingly more power.

The idea that any solutions to problems as subtle as this one will be solved with "legal authority" is out of touch with the direction things are going. Especially since you propose legislation as a method to protect those that:

> that dares to speak out against powerful entities

It's increasingly clear that the vast majority of political resource are going towards the interests of those "powerful entities". If you're not one of them it's best you try to stay out of their way. But if you want to speak out against them, the law is far more likely to be warped against you than the be extended to protect you.

[iugtmkbdfil834]

This. I will offer a small anecdote from way back. In one post-soviet bloc countries, people were demanding that something is done about the corruption, which, up until that moment, has been very much daily bread and butter. So what did the government do? Implement anti corruption law that was hailed as the best thing ever. Only problem was, the law in question punished both corruptor and corruptee effectively making it a show.

[mentalgear]

I agree with many of your points, but I think it can be effective depending on a) the details, b) at what time/type of government it is introduced.

As an example: "freedom of speech" is obviously a good thing, especially if a government becomes more authoritarian, however it can also become one of your society's biggest weaknesses by allowing, especially in the digital space, actors to use that freedom to make just any unfounded statements about anything and anyone leading to a collapse of the basic trust in society (there's a certain power that used this playbook to great success in regard to post truthismus). If instead, a still democratic government would have changed it to, you "freedom of speech - within the limits of what you can prove", that would have kept society on a much more safe lane instead of spiralling out of control through SM (social media) pushed absurdity.