One persons freedom of speech must end when that speech has the intent or damaging the freedoms of many more. Think of that In the same way that burglars have no right to burgle - their physical freedom to act must end where yours and my freedom to not be attacked starts, assuming neither of us is  burglar  of course..

It is quite sensible of organisations that disseminate any sort of content, regardless of who generated it originally  to be beholden to the laws of the land that make spreading hateful, indecent  or otherwise dangerous material a crime. This should work in much the same way that if take part in a radio or TV  station phone in and  go off topic to start a tirade of obscenities , I will be cut off in short order - and if I am not the radio station bosses are taken to task for allowing the broadcast to continue, and may lose their licence to operate..

Now the internet has always run ahead of the legislation, that never foresaw this situation, in much the same way the world of radio was not regulated before the Titanic disaster, but note that it was soon after, with agreed emergency frequencies to be kept clear, listening watches, formal licensing  and so forth.

Even for deliberate obscurity, given how DNS works, there is no difficulty tracing packets at least to the point of leaving the onion router and some way back within - so be careful users of the dark web, and the current question is more about public channels, more like broadcast than a private link.

So history tells us we need the odd disaster to make folk realise what needs to be done.

This may or may not be that moment. I agree the problem is more complex, and realistically moderation can only be done after the fact, as it is on this forum. I can post, you can complain, the mods can remove it, and only concentrate of posts and or users that are complained about.. On a forum like this it is  a reasonable balance between nimbleness and regulation.

Now you could require all fora with more than say 1000 members or websites with more than so many pages  to be licensed and have a contactable moderator (thus keeping the little piddlington flower appreciation society below the threshold for action ), and make running same without the licence  an offence similar to radio piracy.

I'm sure a few folk would see that as heavy handed, but as one with a radio licence I wish to keep spotless I do appreciate internationally agreed band plans, minimal technical standards and enforcement, and see no reason why the internet should not have something similar.

Mike.

PS, Re  the USD;  I suspect it will remain, as it has for a long time, the currency of our richest, and arguably most successful former colony.

One persons freedom of speech must end when that speech has the intent or damaging the freedoms of many more. Think of that In the same way that burglars have no right to burgle - their physical freedom to act must end where yours and my freedom to not be attacked starts, assuming neither of us is  burglar  of course..

It is quite sensible of organisations that disseminate any sort of content, regardless of who generated it originally  to be beholden to the laws of the land that make spreading hateful, indecent  or otherwise dangerous material a crime. This should work in much the same way that if take part in a radio or TV  station phone in and  go off topic to start a tirade of obscenities , I will be cut off in short order - and if I am not the radio station bosses are taken to task for allowing the broadcast to continue, and may lose their licence to operate..

Now the internet has always run ahead of the legislation, that never foresaw this situation, in much the same way the world of radio was not regulated before the Titanic disaster, but note that it was soon after, with agreed emergency frequencies to be kept clear, listening watches, formal licensing  and so forth.

Even for deliberate obscurity, given how DNS works, there is no difficulty tracing packets at least to the point of leaving the onion router and some way back within - so be careful users of the dark web, and the current question is more about public channels, more like broadcast than a private link.

So history tells us we need the odd disaster to make folk realise what needs to be done.

This may or may not be that moment. I agree the problem is more complex, and realistically moderation can only be done after the fact, as it is on this forum. I can post, you can complain, the mods can remove it, and only concentrate of posts and or users that are complained about.. On a forum like this it is  a reasonable balance between nimbleness and regulation.

Now you could require all fora with more than say 1000 members or websites with more than so many pages  to be licensed and have a contactable moderator (thus keeping the little piddlington flower appreciation society below the threshold for action ), and make running same without the licence  an offence similar to radio piracy.

I'm sure a few folk would see that as heavy handed, but as one with a radio licence I wish to keep spotless I do appreciate internationally agreed band plans, minimal technical standards and enforcement, and see no reason why the internet should not have something similar.

Mike.

PS, Re  the USD;  I suspect it will remain, as it has for a long time, the currency of our richest, and arguably most successful former colony.