From Alec Cawley
I cannot accept Molly Sauter’s conceptualisation of a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack as an exercise in free speech (25 October, p 27).
Freedom of speech requires you to be able to declare your political views in a manner that ensures everybody knows you have them and can enquire further. For example, striking workers can parade outside their place of work with placards declaring their dispute, a practice that we allow.
A DDoS is akin to barricading the place of work and physically preventing access by strikebreakers, a practice which we have largely banned for good reason. It runs counter to the notion of free speech, and is a deployment of force to solve problems that should be solved with argument.
Penwood, Berkshire, UK
