Comment by stuartjohnson12
9 months ago
> My objection is precisely that the important thing is to stop abuse, and that blocking just hides something rather than tracking down and stopping the abuse. (To be clear, I do also think it's important to go track down the sites hosting such content and take down the sites. But at the source, not blocking at the border, which is a capability that shouldn't exist.)
I don't think you've justified that objection any other way than saying "stopping it at the source would be better" (which is unambiguously agreeable).
Teaching a man to fish is obviously better than just giving him a fish, but if tuition is not possible due to resource constraints, a fish distribution system isn't a terrible idea.
I am stating the position that the ability for governments to block part of the Internet rather than it being all or nothing is a net negative for the world.