Would you give up freedoms for safety?

Happened upon this article via the NY Times' Twitter feed today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/weekinreview/15markoff.html

Basically, it discusses the security flaws in the current iteration of the Internet and that some are expressing concern that we must scrap the entire network and start over. And in addition to starting over, abandon the ability to be anonymous for the sake of security and safety. In some respects, it's seems similar to the debate on national ID cards in an effort to stem terrorism and illegal immigrants.

What do you think? Are freedoms or safety more important?

I think that, just as is the case with freedom of speech, some will abuse freedoms at the harm of others. But everyone must learn to expect going into the arena of freedom there is an ever present possibility of being on the receiving end of another person's freedoms in the form of venom. I don't think you will be able to have complete discourse with barriers of protection. Imagine how stifled forms of tactical media and parody would be.

Does the Internet need to be improved? Absolutely. Even if the network evolved into a world of true identities and security, there would be a newly developed element of rouges and evil doers.

What if there are people that don't want it?

Seems that despite the notion of the Obama administration proposing a broadband expansion program there might be a big hurdle to overcome other than the price tag.

Pew's Internet & American Life Project report states that there are a large number of people that don't want broadband, even if it's cheaper. Other nuts and bolts of the report illustrate that older and poorer people either don't want the added benefits or don't use the Internet to begin with.

Read all about it at ARS Technica and the Pew report.

How does this hurdle impact the ability to move towards an improved public sphere?