BuyFromEU

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (1 child)

I have whiplash. You've gone from an implied "that's not happening" to "okay so it's happening, and here's why it's a good thing!" Why feign ignorance if you knew that I was correct?

I don't believe any government has the right to restrict which books and news sites I should be allowed to access. I think I am the best person to decide which knowledge I should have access to.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] professionalspooner@feddit.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

Yes. By default we don't want any government intervention. But the "government overreach" needs to be addressed on the specific cases where it happens.

I don't believe any government has the right to restrict which books and news sites I should be allowed to access. I think I am the best person to decide which knowledge I should have access to.

While this statement is true sometimes, it is also again an oversimplification. I don't think even you believe this. If a website contains illegal content, would you really prefer for the government to not intervene?

Classic examples would be the sale of hard drugs and child pictures.

We all agree more than we disagree. But communication is hard and most subjects, especially the hard ones, are not black and white.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago

That's a fair and nuanced take. You're right that there should be some exceptions for illegal content, but my line is clearly much further into the freedom spectrum than the EU has drawn that line. To roll up to my original claim: they would immediately ban many sites on any search engine they created, and they would do so for many reasons I am uncomfortable with.