Remix.run Logo
vladms 14 hours ago

> ... will be required to squash free speech as soon as possible.

Maybe pointing the obvious but things happen if enough people care about them or do not care to oppose them.

From my perspective speech became "more free" lately - meaning everybody says all kind of incorrect, wrong things without fear of retribution even if there are laws against some of those, because people just don't care.

So maybe we should also focus on teaching people what is free speech, why is it good for them, why they needed, rather than worry about some hypothetical mechanism that someone will prevent it.

Of course both can be done, but I find it a bit funny that if the focus in mostly on not having mechanisms to prevent free speech, we might still end up in a situation that there are no such mechanisms but on the other hand nobody speaks freely because they don't care or only stare at their tiktok.

deno 14 hours ago | parent [-]

The whole point is they cannot introduce those laws outright for the obvious reasons they have to sneak it in covertly in guise of safety.

gzread 12 hours ago | parent [-]

By this reasoning we should oppose every law in case it's a foothold to sneak in a different law.

The CA/CO parental controls API law is very reasonable. It only mandates each OS must have a parental controls API, the use of which is up to the parents.

deno 11 hours ago | parent [-]

> By this reasoning we should oppose every law in case it's a foothold to sneak in a different law.

That has been the successful strategy for e.g. NRA w/ regard to 2nd amendment and they have been proven correct every single time.