Re: Three Body Problem

On Sun, 18 Aug 2024, Paul S Person wrote:

With this historical luggage I can never understand how people in europe
can insist on voting for socialists. Give them enough power and they tend
to repeat themselves. Just look at the socialist UK government now
cracking down on free speech. Very sad.

>
First, the UK has a different view of free speech than the USA.
/Their/ gummint can prohibit stories from running in newspapers at
all; ours can not, at least not before they have been published.

Free speech is free spech. What the UK is doing is moving away from it.
That's a fact. If you define free speech, as "not free spech", yes, I
agree with you that UK (and europe) is all about free speech.

Second, they appear to be talking about holding people responsible for
the consequences of their actions. Starting a riot or crying "Fire!"

Actions yes, spreading ideas no. The ones who act on the ideas, yes, the
one who created the ideas, no. It really is that simple, and "fire" is a
bullsh*t argument that should die in todays arguments.
We have all seen the soviet union, cuba, north korea and where abolition
of free speech leads.

in a theater had /always/ been punishable speech. Just because they
are doing it online may make it harder to prove (depending on how the
law is written), but not impossible, and certainly not make it
unreasonable to try.

If it has been punishable does not mean it should be. Once speaking ill
of god was punishable, but fortunately we now include that under free
speech, except for horrible moslem countries and sweden of course who is
never late to cater to moslem voters.
Also note that I am against free speech on private property, in order to
bring that up. On my property I make the rules. In theory then, since
Twitter is a private company, I have actually no philosophical problems
with them censoring everything. But when it comes to the government, and
the governments actions, free speech is absolute, and going after people
based on their opinions and them voicing their opinions, just makes a
country like the soviet union.

I should also point out that their ability to have US citizens
extradicted will depend on how the relevant treaty is written and the
relevant process. If this requires the crime charged to be a crime in
this country, then things may get a bit ... sticky. Consider the LA
prosecutor's attempt to have Roman Polanski from Switzerland [1]: it
failed because the Swiss concluded that he had been sentenced and had
served his sentence and so there was no meat in the LA's hamburger.
>
[1] This occurred during the Great Recession. Given the reduced tax
income of those times, I have been known, from time to time, to wonder
how many rapists and murderers were /not/ prosecuted because the money
needed was spent on their "get Polanski" obsession.
>