[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: words have value, for good or ill
Zooko Journeyman <[email protected]> wrote:
>Actually I think we are discussing the morality of words, not of
>thoughts. Words are actions in my book. (ObDcashPunks: Note that
>the right words to the effect of "I hereby give you this cash token.
>Signed, Alice" _are_ the same as the action of giving the person the
>cash token. :-) )
It looks like we lost some context across the Atlantic.
In the United States when we are discussing free speech there are
usually some common assumptions that are used to simplify the
discussion. Usually when free speech is being discussed, we do not
mean contracts, coercive threats, or copyrighted works. Strictly
speaking, of course, those are speech, but that usually isn't what is
meant over here. (1)
The speech I am talking about is the kind of things which Tim May has
been writing. To keep things simple, let's consider the statement
"McVeigh did the right thing." It is not a contract. It is not a
threat. It is not copyrighted.
It is simply a belief which Tim May considered and posted to the list.
I think we've fairly settled that it is not immoral to have this
thought. So the question really is, if you have such a thought, is it
immoral to express it?
It's hard for me to see how. If the belief is correct, then other
people certainly will benefit from hearing it. If the belief is not
correct, then other people may be able to enlighten you. In either
case, it is preferable that the belief be expressed.
>> What you seem to be proposing is that Tim May (or whoever) should
>> refrain from expressing certain of their beliefs about the world
>> because they are immoral.
>
>I don't speak for Anonymous (:-)), but what _I_ propose is that the
>meme of "it was okay/justified/right for me to say it because it
>should be legal for me to say it" shall eradicated from cypherpunks
>discourse.
I'm not sure I understand what you are proposing. My dictionary defines
"eradicate" in two ways:
1. to destroy utterly
2. to erase or remove
I don't believe the meme should be "destroyed" and I'm not sure I'm
comfortable with the means that would be required to do this. Nor do
I see it as desirable to erase or remove posts which have already been
made, if it were even possible.
If you don't like somebody's ideas, I would suggest that you don't
read their messages. If you don't want to see a particular idea,
perhaps you could hire somebody to remove the posts from your mail
queue that contain it. If you don't like other people hearing certain
ideas, I recommend you get used to it.
(1) It is interesting to consider a world in which these exceptions
are not made.
If there were no coercive enforcement mechanisms for contracts, then
this exception would not have to exist. The idea of doing business
solely on the basis of reputation is not only fascinating, but not
very unlike much of the world today.
There are two ways in which threats can be no ops. One is if the
person being threatened is just a public key whose identity is simply
unknown. A threat in that case is irrelevant. The second is if the
person being threatened can adequately protect him or herself in which
case the threat is dangerous to the threatener.
And "intellectual property" is somewhat peculiar and implies a
centralized enforcement mechanism. If we are to have "intellectual
property" in a worldwide networked environment, it implies a de facto
world government. The alternative may be preferable.
Monty Cantsin
Editor in Chief
Smile Magazine
http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html
http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm
Subject: Re: words have value, for good or ill
To: [email protected]
25BA1A9F5B9010DD8C752EDE887E9AF3 [Cantsin Protocol No. 2]
94C43229A76383D818D39952F7A41ACA0394C6FE
4E027939BD9DC5F3EACD8C2EE96F6030C214D1C6
-E5C E5C
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