if you only give value to the things that existed before in history, then you cant argue anything *but* the status quo

if we debated things on the merit of whether they existed before, literally every single advancement in civilization would not have happened

so let not

I would say precedent is a very solid determinant of if something will work or not, but fine, we can avoid that topic for now

How would you accomplish your ultimate goal

through technology

we've already seen where technology has allowed functioning decentralized organizations to thrive

think wikipedia, bittorrent, linux, ect ect

Certainly

so why couldnt it be used for governments too

where no government exists because the people self manage themselves through technology

I think that something like Bittorent which allows people to share files is different from the exercise of power

well duh, one's a file sharing site

but the fact is, it exists and thrives without leadership, without central authority, and its actually better for it

Sure

It's also used for sharing terrible content like child porn

true, but that is the price to pay

computers in general are used to share cp

should we ban computers?

thats a fallacy i often see, blaming the tool for the issue and not the core problem

As far as I'm concerned, giving up certain freedoms in exchange for other freedoms is a worthy trade

knives kill people, but they also prepare food

you assume that giving these freedoms up would solve the issue

thats what most people dont get, even if you track and watch everybody, people will still get through the cracks

no system is perfect

encryption is already out there, you can backdoor and break every social media and platform, hackers will just find others

its a game of infinite whackamole, and youre willing to sacrifice your freedoms for that loosing battle

Yes, but we still use encryption because it makes it harder for hackers

We still put locks on our doors even though it takes one rock to smash a window

We have security not because it'll stop every single criminal

It's a means of deterrence

It's the same reason we punish criminals

but does it work?

We want people to not want to commit crimes

most of the time, it doesnt

i mean, lets just look on the war on drugs for one example

"Most of the time"

The majority of people don't use illegal drugs

and do you really think thats because of its legality?

yea

i do