I agree to a point.

In terms of the hypersonic missiles, they do... it's just that the media isn't savvy enough to realise anything ballistic is also hypersonic. SpaceX Rockets are hypersonic. The point with "hypersonic" missiles is their ability to manoeuvre and cruise around the globe. Those the Russians and Chinese do not have yet... we do.

Well would you sue a Chinese company in China or in a Western country if you wanted to unlock a spurious IP claim for rest of world development? If a Chinese company wanted to clog up a capital raising / commercialisation program for a tech/defence company it'd do it also in the western legal system as they can enforce legal discovery and injunct progress.. in which case, legal discovery is in the West. My guess is we will soon just end up ring fencing China in IP law and ignoring them. They've ignored us for a long time, and now as they actually work on product development and new research we could just as easily take there IP. The question will be over Chinese controlled Western companies... that's a greyzone.

It's going to be a real issue.. if you are developing say some new tech and you go to fund raise to commercialise it, the first thing serious investors do is get an IP lawyer to ensure there are no possible future IP claims. All these BS Chinese submissions can count as potential claims on that new tech. Now, you can sue the Chinese scientists but that requires disclosure of your own research, and investors will just run away. Net result you either end up showing them your IP for them to copy to win, or you don't get funding. Either way, they can F up whole new fields of science and development. AI probably could do too but I'm just talking China as thats as far as my knowledge extends.

Well said on stealing IP, but they can block IP development in the West with BS scientific journal submissions..

What China does is pump out a literal wall of science papers and journal submissions with next to no actual results (or fabricated results). What they are doing is giving themselves the ability to challenge any and all IP developed in the rest of the world. The problem with IP law is that any science journal submission no matter how spurious or lacking scientific rigour can still create an IP claim if real research is then undertaken in that field. They may even be aware of the development of a tech breakthrough in say a US university and they create fake research to be able to access the IP in discovery.

What absolute bullshit. We already have controls on what we discuss - terrorism, paedophilia, etc. It's not ideological to remove those discussions- It's civilisation. The problem with unfiltered social media is it leads to the congregation of idiots and evil.

Zuckerberg keeps calling it the town hall, but towns have idiots and people who are very sick in the head and they now congregate.

Previously they were ostracised and outsiders in their community but now thanks to the internet the one moron in each town who thought the world was flat now congregates with the one village idiot from the other million towns across the world making their numbers promotable by the stupid algorithms behind social media. Net result we have a rise in Flat Earth theory. Bravo for our civilisation.

I'm all for the free discourse of ideas that advance the human civilisation, but Joe and Bob down on the corner sharing their love of snuff porn or sharing photos of little kids should be excised from our society. Otherwise, we are bound for idiocracy.

We have a functional legal system and a functional democracy. Who said anything about one person making the decision. We have worked out regulations and laws for centuries - why so little faith now? II don't get how that somehow ends in fascism. How do you think we worked out property laws, libel laws, any law for that matter?

What we currently confront is a small group of extremely wealthy and powerful people who think they stand above the our legal and political system. That needs to end. They are not above either and their platforms need to be brought to account to the legal system and to the people. Their argument that what they've created is somehow a uniquely separate ecosystem to that which the rest of us operates is bullshit.. it's elitism. It's why we had revolutions to devolve power to the people away from kings and others who held individual power over us.

Haha. Do you even know what fascism is?

I'm saying It's the end of liability free behaviour by major social media and online news service entities.. like a normal business, they should not be able to promote lies, incite violence or terrorism, host criminal material. That's being civilised. Even the Wild West had rules. It's not like they're a bunch of teenagers working out of their parents basement anymore. They're bigger and vastly more powerful than companies that are heavily regulated.

I think we are all getting to the end of endless self actualisation... even paedophiles are trying to normalise their behaviour as a sexual deviation or compare it to being something relatively normal like being gay rather than an evil act.. that's because they can congregate and normalise online.

Short answer is yes. Whether a commons, billboards or bulletin board - all these are policed and laws applied. If you trip on a manhole in a town square and fall down breaking a leg, the council is liable. The days of the Internet being the wild west are over and frankly good. Humans don't need a space to express themselves - we need a tool to build better lives, spread equality and opportunity and beneficial connection. Not flat earthers, terrorists and other low life losers and criminals.