Hello List:

On 10/14/2016 11:53 AM, Stefan Huchler wrote:
> Jan Eichstaedt <jan.eichsta...@iopn.org> writes:
>> Hello ng0, hello list,
>> Thank you for your thoughtful post. Please read my comments below.
> Hi Jan again,
> I think you also choose a bad time for your question, at the moment we
> have massive oppression of free speech, Wikileaks, Manning, and not only
> this people they go after many proffessional journalists, too.
> http://www.cjr.org/criticism/barack_obamas_press_freedom_legacy.php
> So like also in this article mentioned we are at war with power. literly
> war, not at least western countries physical wars but WW3 about
> information and free speech and so on.

Please let me suggest to tone down and focus on the task at hand, i.e.
find an answer to The Question and decide whether or not to put it in
the FAQ. Thinking in terms of war is usually worsening things. Also
simplifying in terms of good and bad seem to distract. I tried to
introduce humane -- inhumane, instead, because one has a definition in
the human rights as adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly
resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948.

Also this does not need to become a discussion on censorship. Even if
one would try to do something about abuse one would not necessarily need
to censor certain content. There are a variety of measures besides it:
from expressing the mere intention to instantiate some
not-yet-decided-upon rules on the low end to chasing villains of some
sort when they already have committed something in the open on another
end (not necessarily high).

An answer to The Question is necessary as early as possible because the
answer potentially might have an impact how to proceed with the entire
GNUnet Project.

I hope this helps,

> And we have prism and co total survalence woldwide police state.
> So in times of war the priority is clear protect us from the
> attacker. Its not really the time to get very picky with alied.
> So of course you could put something into the faq, but the priority
> should be to have a effective way to protect ourself from the attacker,
> and thats hard enough to reach, maybe in better times in 10 years its
> better to adress that.
> I mean ok its not so much literal speech that is shared but more data
> movies/pictures etc.
> Lets say somebody shares a propagada video about isis, I still find it
> questionable to try to cencor it. ( I know people like to use other
> words for it, because if its good censoring you should use another word
> but dont wordpick here). Its like banning drugs, yes certain drugs have
> very bad effects on many people, still banning it is the wrong solution,
> having education about it, and allow it so you can control it to some
> point, is the better solution.
> You will most likely make it even worse with the attempt to censor
> it. you will never be perfect to censor the perfect right things and
> only those, so people see ohh you bann that, even its something that
> should not be banned, that makes people stopp believing you and then
> such blacklist becomes the next wishlist for people.
> Every child with 10 years now can watch porn on youporn as much as it
> wants, do we see really bad problems, are this childs much worse than
> previous generations? No.
> Whatever you can argue about free speech and what is covered in that of
> course, but you have to see that at least it cant have been the priority
> to attack that issue.
> I guess if gnunet would really become the basicly new internet for many
> people and people would slender others on it with a real impact on their
> lives, you should maybe have some mechanisms to prevent that.
> But we are far away from it, as soon as something goes mainstream such
> rules will enforced on them anyway. Or at some point it will be
> forbidden.
> But we are also far away from gnunet beeing mainstream if it ever will be.
> _______________________________________________
> Help-gnunet mailing list
> Help-gnunet@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnunet

Help-gnunet mailing list

Reply via email to