zlacker

>>walter+(OP)
Looks like, unsurprisingly, the resolution is more about mandating censorship than it is about curbing actual crime. I'm pretty pessimistic about the future of a free internet - there have been lots of attempts at censorship-resistant protocols, but they require widespread adoption. If they haven't already been adopted, I doubt they ever will.

>>comman+xT7
> Looks like, unsurprisingly, the resolution is more about mandating censorship than it is about curbing actual crime.

Well, the EFF's take on the resolution is always going to be more about the censorship it introduces than how much it enables law enforcement to curb actual crime.

I'm aligned with the EFF on this, and would vote against this if it were raised in any democratic forum I voted in, but that's because I care more about reducing censorship than reducing online crime. Yes, I, unlike most voters in modern liberal democracies, would let ten paedos walk free to save one Aaron Swartz.

If you really care about them ~equally - as you have to, for your comment to be made in good faith - then you can't take your talking points from the EFF.