danger/u/
Information should just exists without censorship, accessible to all.

| How much do you agree with statement.

Information: facts provided about anything. for objective reasons, let's say if you are a good person, you would not know the personal information from others. That kind of information is reserved for people that gain the trust of that person for them to give it to them.

accessible: can be reached easily


| Yes, but who will quality check all this information if it's 100% open? It's gonna be flooded with false information and peoples biases and those things are dangerous.

Also, most people don't need to know how easy it is to ruin RETRACTED or how to get away with murder etc. Teaching some stuff is more dangerous than shutting up sometimes.

It's easy to say "this is how it should be" if you don't have a plan for implementing it, or even realising if it's possible to achieve or not.


| Imagine allowing the Anarchist's Cookbook to be freely accessible.


| >>573401
literally nothing would happen lmao it's a shit book

all info should be free


| If information was free, especially artworks, there would be much less quality information. If we don't value creators, they can't create, because they'll be too busy doing low skill jobs to get food.


| >>573430
The most printed books are shitbooks:
The Bible, the Quran, mein Kampf, twilight, 50 shades of grey, etc.
The last ones aren't even free, since they were bestsellers.


| >>573544
i can pull all of them up in less than a minute right now


| To all gurls saying information needs to be curated, who will do that? And how can you trust that the people cleaning up and removing fake stuff won't make biased choices and just remove whatever they disagree with?

IMO, information should be free, it is up to each person to decide what to believe or not.

But to each their own, if you'd rather trust some person or entity to filter bad info at the risk of it all being manipulated then it's your choice.


| >>573605
it's the same argumentative basis as fascism vs democracy
>meets marx how
lol


| >>573615 could you please explain a little bit more? I'm confused about your statement.


| >>573635
it's the man of action principle. in a dictatorship you're supposed to follow the guy on top and that's it. you don't know if he's good or even fukin sane for that matter, but you follow him because you have no choice. even mosley realized that this was possibly the #1 problem in 'fascism'.
and so it's the same thing for censorship. first of all, why the fuck censor anything, right, but then also, who do you trust to censor things? it's bound to be misused. power corrupts.


| >>573640 now I get it, thanks for explaining! :D


| >>573641
hmmmm


| The problem is that people are retarded.
Democracy operates on the basis that all people are equal, and when presented with all information, they will make the right choice. Truth is actually the opposite. Most are stupid, and they would rather believe information that confirms their (wrong) views than actually have their facts checked. You need teachers in schools because if you leave some kids to their own devices, they will never learn anything.
In fact, some never grow up.


| >>573401 Do you think it's hard to get or something?


| >>573647 people seem to forget how easy it is to find stuff on the internet, like give me a few minutes with a browser and I can find almost any book without even having to enter the tor network


| >>573651
you got a neat website you wanna share? just fishing with filetype:pdf or filetype:ebook is very tedious and rarely successful


| Yea open source government...


| What about government secrets, illegal photos, child exploutation content, NDA contracts, copywright, personal indentifying info, building plans and schematics, drug synthesis manuals, explosive manufacturing manuals, con artist and pickup artist manuals, slanderous or otherwise blatantly false content, and calls to violence? Should all of these really be freely available?


| >>573897 if the owner of all this info is ok with it, sure.
One thing is free info, another is a breach of ownership.
At the very least any info that falls on public domain should be free, all else is up to the parties that have ownership of the data.


| >>573901
What's in the public domain and not free ?


| >>573901
Ownership of immaterial things is in pracise a very problematic thing foe two reasons:
- It's an artificial restriction of the nature of information in order to satisfy bourgeois/capitalist property ideology. This transfers all issues known from the material world to the immaterial. It's questionable if there are any advantages
- It's technical very hard to implement, which isn't only a waste of (material) ressources but also comes with the high risk of power missusage.


| But if we follow your logic, why waste your time researching, creating, perfecting and optimizing something only for the next dude to come and profit off it? And don't give me that "greater good" drivel. Without the incentive of money and power, most would just sit on their asses and play video games all day.
Thats why the dark ages happened. People had no incentive to improve their lot since it was god's design, and "that's how people have always lived".


| >>574132 ok, so if someone gets ahold of your passport or ID or any other personal document you'd be ok with it being shared over the internet? I mean they wouldn't even be sharing the document itself, just the info it contains.

Dude that's dumb, take away my physical objects but my info belongs to me and I'm not ok with giving it away


| Just allow trust thru pubkey encryption and signing.


| Information should be free and accessible if it is placed there with no encryption. Anything on here without encryption is literally free to read. You are living in a world of free and partially accessible info. We just gotta work on the latter


| >>574143 The incentive is death, silly.


| >>574143
>But if we follow your logic, why waste your time researching, creating, perfecting and optimizing something only for the next dude to come and profit off it?
I dunno. You may ask scientists, researchers and engineers that work in public institutions. Or people that produce commons content like wikipedia authors and those who write program code licencing as free or at least open source.
>And don't give me that "greater good" drivel.
Ok, but what's with the "common good"?


| >>574474
>why waste your time researching, creating, perfecting and optimizing something only for the next dude to come and profit off it?
Also you forgot about the whole education sector. Education is all about giving people information (for free!) so that they can profit from it. Except you are against free education, which according to your logic should be the case. But where should all those succesful enterpreneuers that had to stard from zero have their knowledge from?


| >>574143
>Thats why the dark ages happened. People had no incentive to improve their lot since it was god's design, and "that's how people have always lived".
That's not true. Every serious historian will deny this. The "dark ages" are mostly a hollywood meme. People were pretty innovative and not that religious as portraied (but very superstitious, which they still are).
The "dark ages" just happened because the downfall of the roman empire, which became a victim of its success.


| >>574143 >>574476
And while the, by far not that dark, "dark ages", the eastern roman empire did remain a little longer. It was finally conquered too, but by the arabs, who were a bit better/faster in adopting and developing ancient knowledge than the northern/western barbarians (which also weren't that uncultivated as portrayed by roman propaganda). So the "dark ages" aren't only a exaggerated term but also very western-/eurocentric.


| >>573544 *tips fedora* yeah....the Bible is pretty cringe....


| >>574476 usury


| It should not be free as in not allowed to be charged for, but it shouldn't be restricted from being shared either
Files are inherently worthless because there is an infinite supply of them, you can copy them virtually forever, and by copying you don't prevent the original owner of using it
Someone can choose to charge for a certain file, but another one taking that file and freedly distributing it isn't wrong either
This is kind of what we have today, with few annoyances like drm

Total number of posts: 34, last modified on: Sun Jan 1 00:00:00 1561932062

This thread is closed.