I am generally against censorship but had to revise that stance after I realized we've given a global platform to manipulative idiots truly unworthy of global self-expression. If they want to espouse their crap they can stand on a real soapbox and shout at crowds, but nothing more
Neat, and who decides whose "crap" is unworthy of freedom of speech?
Like, my main objection with censorship isn't "I think that this particular idea is worthy of defending", it's that any mechanism that lets people censor bad opinions could also by used to censor good opinions, and that mechanism is way too powerful and prone to abuse for my comfort.
I find reading the way much of society reacted to the original suffragettes very useful for calibration purposes.
"Actually, women should be able to vote" would absolutely have been censored entirely had the establishment then had the sort of tools people are advocating to build now.
The fundamental problem is that we need some way of separating good ideas from bad, as a society. Sure, it was a big leap forward when we switched from "whatever the king says" to "let everyone shout as loud as they can and whoever shouts the loudest wins", but the truth we have to face up to is that neither method works particularly well, especially in the age of the internet.
So, is there a better system? A way we can bubble "good" ideas up and suppress "bad" ideas, ideally without some corruptible central arbiter? And, will such a system inevitably be viewed as "censorship" by some, purely on the principle that the current shouting-based system favors them more than a meritocratic one would?
Yeah yeah yeah. I know. And I stopped caring. The that deserve to be muzzled (or worse, but that's not appropriate here...) are the manipulators of all kinds and colors. If the message has any kind of CTA, particularly political, it should be suppressed.
Left, right, commerical, political, it doesn't matter. Suppress them all.
You've come out against idiots spreading misinformation and calls to action _in general_ in this thread. You don't want tolerance, you want orthodoxy. Intolerance of all things that are bad, tolerance of things that are good. If only the cowards at Cloudflare agreed with you!
Orthodoxy has its own issues. What I want is nothing, for people to reach their own conclusions on the merits of whatever it is they are considering, and to be left alone in the quiet of my own thoughts without having to withdraw from society completely
CDNs aren't making you look at anything. The service they offer makes websites quickly accessible to people who request them. You believe that CDNs should not offer that service to those you consider propagandists.
How does the availability of a website that you dislike affect your ability to be left alone in the quiet of your own thoughts?
Pretty much. People are being pulled in a thousand different directions by people with their calls-to-action.
Mainly targeting advertisements and political messaging. More prosaic stuff like filing your taxes on time can be conveyed effectively without commanding people to do things. "Taxes are due by April 15th" would work fine, for example.
Couple that with some of the evidence as to why and you have a pretty good message to get out.
So very many people don't like being told what to do, and all we do is yell at them with commands and imperatives. Personally it has given me a burning contempt for the kind of folks that promulgate this stuff. If someone wants to compel me into action then they need to convince me on its merits, and those merits alone.
life is political. So you would have to suppress all communication about life. Show me content and I will show you politics. A video of children playing in a pool: Are they dressed appropiately? Are they playing the right games? Are their surroundings a capitalistic dream without meaning? What about a b-actor soap series? a wikihow on how to make beer? a podcast on how to make vegan yoghurt? an article about curing meat? There are no things unpolitical. life is political.
No, politics and social mores inserts itselves into these situations. I can guarantee you that those kids are thinking about none of those things.
And what exactly makes politics mandatory in an article about brewing beer? Curing meat? If people stick to the essence of what they are trying to convey without getting lost in political rhetoric people can, in fact, communicate clearly. But you have to stick to the matter at hand.
>"The internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it" was absolutely a thing.
It was actually never a thing. The internet has always been censored, everywhere, all the time.
People just think it wasn't because sometimes it let them be edgy racist shitlords and they confused that with unfettered freedom of speech. Still do, unfortunately.
I'm not sure what site you're referring to, and that proves my following point....
There are multiple CDN providers. Unless they're all doing this, OP doesn't have to go with the specific one you're calling out here and can still reap the benefits.
