> > Through all of mankind we had strong mechanisms to form consensus, including social repercussions. > This is a dangerous, dangerous path to go down to if you belong to any kind of enlightment inspired ideology.

Mechanisms to form consensus does not necessarily mean rule by mob, quite the opposite. Positive consensus mechanisms can be trust in the scientific method, institutional credibility, and acceptance of reason. These mechanisms can support an enlightenment ideology, not prevent it.

I wasn't talking about mob rule. I was talking about an orthodoxy that's ruthlessly enforced by those in power. Cause that's what it was before.

"Freedom of speech" is not an accident. Enlightenment thinkers have been pondering this for 200 years and more and objections have been successfully adressed over and over again. It's as much of the type of consensus you describe as we will ever have. 'But computers' is not sufficient to just do away with it.

Pretty naive if you apply this conclusion to many countries in the world.