alt Hacker NewsSigh. Yes, it depends on context. Like everything.
Yet, what’s the point of pedantic digressions that distract and muddy rather than clarify and communicate?
Replies
redsocksfan45 • yesterday at 9:31 PM
[dead]
Sigh. Yes, it depends on context. Like everything.
Yet, what’s the point of pedantic digressions that distract and muddy rather than clarify and communicate?
[dead]
You're specifically arguing that speech that harms is disallowed, and algorithms could be construed as harmful, so hey, let's not protect them with free speech.
These are legal matters, so pedantry is part of the equation. The popehat piece is specifically written to refute this entire line of argument: free speech has extremely specific carveouts, and the way you're arguing isn't in line with how that would be expanded. This is outlined very specifically in the Popehat piece.
This is in no way a pedantic digression: I'm pointing out a fundamental flaw in your proposal, and citing work by lawyers that describes that flaw in detail.