Law in the Internet Society

View   r13  >  r12  ...
BahradSokhansanjSecondPaper 13 - 21 Jan 2012 - Main.BahradSokhansanj
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="SecondPaper"

We Are All Prometheus Now

Line: 55 to 55
 I think the argument for freedom would have to be from first principles, that freedom is precious, futility - that restricting freedom would not work, or that restricting freedom in the area in question would have offsetting perverse consequences somewhere else. I think the piece as it is now leans towards the 'it's futile to try to restrict freedoms in this area' argument.

-- DevinMcDougall - 20 Jan 2012

Added:
>
>

Thank you very much for your thoughtful comments, Devin. I'm going to have to think about this... I'm not sure what it would be to argue for freedom from first principles might look like? I'm trying to start from the initial point that we associate the core of freedom as being the freedom of thought, and that's what's being challenged by all of this -- so if you want the restrictions, then you have to accept the loss of that core freedom (and then what freedoms are really left?) and then, that this would be futile anyway, so it's not really like you're trading freedom for anything but illusory security -- and in fact, real solutions for the security problems can only come from human creativity, which requires freedom to think about these unthinkable algorithms.

-- BahradSokhansanj - 21 Jan 2012

 
 
<--/commentPlugin-->

Revision 13r13 - 21 Jan 2012 - 20:00:06 - BahradSokhansanj
Revision 12r12 - 20 Jan 2012 - 21:59:59 - DevinMcDougall
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM