Reconciling Information Privacy and Liberty?

thetan asks: "F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote that 'The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.' However, for many outsiders, it's hard to understand how cliques reconcile seemingly contrarian views. For example, many US Republicans are against abortion but in favour of the death penalty (no doubt they have their reasons). Amongst the Slashdot commentariat, one often hears that information wants to be free, almost as a catchcry of the open source, copyfight and related info-libertarian movements. OTOH, these same Slashdot readers stridently guard their privacy, so presumably information about their shopping preferences or websurfing does not 'want to be free'. How does the intelligent and functional Slashdot crowd reconcile the liberty of other people's information with the privacy of their own?"

Comments

Re:Libre, *not* gratis.

[Thalagyrt]

Having pro-life forced on you could be bad when say, a girl is 16 and gets pregnant. Because then, that ruins an innocent person's life for good because she's stuck supporting that child. Quite often when that happens, the person can never get back on their feet financially for most of their life. One solution is adoption, but most people wouldn't put a child up for adoption.

Re:MOD PARENT DOWN!!

[ShaniaTwain]

Thay use teh word fucked!!

think of the unborn children!!

AAAAAaaaggghhghhHHH!!!!