This kind of thing can never be materially accomplished though. Whenever you post something publicly to the internet, any recipient can back it up indefinitely, separately from the origin network. This is a fundamental material reality. No amount of legislation or centralized control of the content can overcome it.
Ultimately people will have to culturally/collectively get over everyone's internet past, change their own behavior after understanding this new reality, and deal with the consequences of their speech. Even if it were possible, having the ability to remove all copies of past speech would probably produce worse social outcomes. I think I'd rather deal with a person's complicated history, than a history that has been selectively revised to deceive me.
Private, perishable communication is only possible peer-to-peer, through a secure tunnel or network you own, with a person you trust to delete it. The same applies to verbal speech honestly, if you tell somebody something in confidence, it's up to them not to tell anybody else. People just need to accept that using twitter is like making a press release and not like talking to some friends.
As a native born floridian, the claim that southern republicans are not good at critical and analytical thinking seems true to me. Surely they're out there, but I haven't met them yet, and I've met plenty of conservative southerners.
If your voting base prefers the blood of christ over a facemask to protect from coronavirus, you probably aren't writing bills based on, uh, informed analysis of relevant data.
You're right. But you have to recognize it is because corporations recognized they can commodify tons of their code to reduce costs and improve code quality and security. The linux foundation has dozens of multi-million-dollar partner corporations, whereas the FSF has maybe 5000 contributing members globally. But those corporations have no reason to guarantee that your computer will do what you want it to do, and many reasons to guarantee that it will do what they want it to do. This is a pervasive norm now, especially on hackernews where the demographic is primarily entrepreneurial web-only devs.
Before deriding free software, ask yourself, who benefits from being able to read the source code of a program that restricts what ebooks you can read?
Going to jail or conversion therapy as ordered by a judge for the crime of being gay already has happened. The 'reeducation' camps already existed we just didn't call them that. Keep enjoying your imaginary future victimization though, I'm sure it'll make you super relatable to other oppressed people.
Ultimately people will have to culturally/collectively get over everyone's internet past, change their own behavior after understanding this new reality, and deal with the consequences of their speech. Even if it were possible, having the ability to remove all copies of past speech would probably produce worse social outcomes. I think I'd rather deal with a person's complicated history, than a history that has been selectively revised to deceive me.
Private, perishable communication is only possible peer-to-peer, through a secure tunnel or network you own, with a person you trust to delete it. The same applies to verbal speech honestly, if you tell somebody something in confidence, it's up to them not to tell anybody else. People just need to accept that using twitter is like making a press release and not like talking to some friends.