I think the right to privacy should not be absolute, it must be balanced against other rights.<p>Same goes for the right to free speech.<p>For example, if someone is broadcasting to 1 million people, their message should adhere to some standards. If something is really a popular message, it can be spread using &quot;totally protected&quot; speech to up to 1000 people at a time. I think giving a platform to ISIS and others to easily spread their mind virus and continually infect some susceptible 0.1% is irresponsible. Inciting violence on public television would have been unacceptable and regulated.<p>It&#x27;s an economic concept known as the free rider problem. If you guarantee total protection to speech for ANY number of recipients, people and organizations will find ways to abuse it. The free tier should be limited.<p>Ideas replicating, on the other hand, is only limited by the amount of attention &#x2F; allegiance any given person has. The only way we&#x27;ll get a free rider problem there is when computers spread ideas among each other like computer viruses. And for that, we need to secure our protocols and implementations.