Nice find. Though the complexity of it is still hanging like a chad. It took me a couple of rereads of this paragraph;
"It's an even finer line between philosophical absolutism and "just once in the name of popular condemnation." If that sounds obtuse it's because I unsuccessfully tried to boil down something complex into a few wordsÂ…" but once again, assured that all "ism's" bug me. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolutism> Corporations (and and to lesser and greater degrees, governments) like to claim that people, the consumer or the market dictate their actions (or laws enacted), business and bottom line. Censuring is the opposite of this (at least that is as best I can explain myself at the moment). It works (free speech in this case) when it "Works" for them. I like how this was summed up (others have said it better)... "Net Neutrality isn't just about gate-keeping, it's about fundamental rights to speak our minds whether or not others think we should, and about other people not being able to stop us from speaking our minds. But most of all, it's about the people keeping control of their free-speech area, and keeping it open for debate." If I had to choose between filtered and unfiltered. I am going with unfiltered. I pick what I want to read, can research what I don't know or understand, and ultimately filter what is of interest (into the glass) and ignore (Flush) the crap. But I guess what is more important to me is that even things that I don't agree with can have a positive impact on my decision making or contribute to my knowledge of a subject, event or opposing opinion. Knowledge truly is power. It is what you do with it. Go ahead ... say I suffer from Idealism. That "ism" is one I do like. Hey really liked the four language Hip Hop vid. Post the whole thing! --- In [email protected], "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Here's a good blog post describing recent episodes of Youtube > censoring the videos on its site, and crumbling under government > pressure: > http://tinyurl.com/34bk8w > > "Even in America, where freedom of speech is the first among rights, > there will be struggles to define its limits, where it is acceptable > to speak, and how loudly. But remember this: If speech on the Internet > is determined by terms of service agreements set forth by private > companies not only beholden to advertisers, partners and shareholders, > but also to international pressures, then there will be no real > freedom of speech on the Internet." > > Jay > > -- > http://jaydedman.com > 917 371 6790 >
