Anil Dash's analysis of Sam Altman's free speach essay
I had a lot of issues with Sam Altman&#x27;s post-<p>* He really doesn&#x27;t seem to understand the difference between free speech and being free of consequences, and as a result he&#x27;s in danger of suppressing free speech. He wants people to be able to say controversial things without there being blowback, but the only possible way to accomplish that is by suppressing the free speech of people who disagree. You&#x27;re either for free speech- which includes the right to criticize ideas- or he&#x27;s arguing that specific people&#x27;s speech (the person with the &quot;novel physics idea&quot; for example) are more important than others.<p>* His example of China, one of the worst human rights violators who has been known for violently suppressing free speech, is just a continuation of that. He&#x27;s happy because as a privileged person with money China is super excited to hear his ideas, but he&#x27;s also ignoring the fact that China literally jails and kills people who speak out with ideas that their government doesn&#x27;t like.<p>* He completely ignores the damage done by hate speech. Just completely ignores it. If you were to read this blog as is it seems like he thinks people being driven out of companies, schools, education programs, and development communities by bigotry and sexism were never going to contribute or that their losses aren&#x27;t as important as the ideas being lost to people uncomfortable being called out for bigotry.<p>* The blog seems to put a higher value on innovation and corporations than it does people.