Doesn't a secure Internet make individual users more vulnerable. In dictatorships around the world, the easier it is for the authorities to track down and author, the harder it is for the author to be free.
I really don't understand why no one seems to get what I'm saying.. was it really communicated that poorly, or is the idea just so radical that no one can even imagine it?
Duality, please look up the definition. It's possible to have both a secure and open infrastructure running side by side.
Even if we all agreed in advance that free speech is the highest priority in advance, the Bush administration seems to have no respect for citizen's whatsoever, so it might be necessary to be putting political pressure on all the way through the design process to prevent backsliding.
Doesn't a secure Internet make individual users more vulnerable. In dictatorships around the world, the easier it is for the authorities to track down and author, the harder it is for the author to be free.
ReliableInsider 3 years ago
*an author
ReliableInsider 3 years ago
I really don't understand why no one seems to get what I'm saying.. was it really communicated that poorly, or is the idea just so radical that no one can even imagine it?
Duality, please look up the definition. It's possible to have both a secure and open infrastructure running side by side.
neotoy 3 years ago
I'm not disagreeing. I haven't given it any profound thought.
I'm just saying let's thing of the importance of protecting speech whatever we do.
If we love democracy, and we do, then we have to protect speech.
ReliableInsider 3 years ago
Even if we all agreed in advance that free speech is the highest priority in advance, the Bush administration seems to have no respect for citizen's whatsoever, so it might be necessary to be putting political pressure on all the way through the design process to prevent backsliding.
ReliableInsider 3 years ago