Security News > 2021 > March > Friday Squid Blogging: Vampire Squid Fossil

"Speech absolutism is more a dream than a thing. I prefer answering bad ideas with good ones, not through the camber of a barrel loaded with a projectile."

I think "Hate speech" is a concept so flawed it shouldn't be used outside metaphorical speech, because: in being specific in accusing others of 'hate speech', imo it is then obivously paradoxical, that one is attributing ill will to others by decree, which in itself would then be the same as 'hate' or 'hating'.

Your idea of a 'speech space' I think can easily be abused conceptually and as an analogy I think it ought to have stated limitations, because if 'speech space' was to be a general notion for people, of an analogy of space as a metric where you simply relate to countless instances of opinions being made in ways, and not only making a point about conglomeratization of media, then it seems to me that you maybe want to make an association of 'speech' as something inevitable but for potential reasons I would find very suspicious.

I can think of ways to abuse the use of a more general idea like a 'speech space' being publishing space and alluding to a space for speech but incorporating novel ways to call speech 'publishing', by adding or actualizing special claims later on for the 'merit of speech' as being either 'inevitable' and cannot be harmed thus trivializing speech as something that cannot be taken away from you as it would be deemed something free for you anyway, and then afterwards asking or demanding there to now be 'a merit' to 'speech', which would politize a normal human activity like voicing opinions, and suppress it in ways by so called 'moderation or outright censorship.

I think the vagueness and pretentiousness of your idea reminds me of Donald Rumsfeld's ill conceived notions about 'unknown unknowns', because to think about so called "Speech", as belonging to a imaginary 'speech space' and which in turn is thought of as being a part of what could makes up 'stochastic terrorism'; I will argue that 'speech space' then becomes so fantastical, the way one could identify terrorism with speech in some objective way, would be by idiocy, or public decree, something wholly idiotic, or something authoritarian.

It would then become a bullshit, or, an erranous argument to claim that some speech is/was, or, could be stochastic terrorism, because one claim to be detecting some speech as terrorism, when what one is doing is making an attribution, as opposed to detection.

News URL

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2021/03/friday-squid-blogging-vampire-squid-fossil.html