* fix an obvious typo

contents/english/4-0-rights-os-and-⿻-freedom.md

@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ Systems of rights and OSs have many common traits: they serve as foundations for
 
 #### Dynamism 
 
-OSs are self-evidently dynamic, just as systems of rights are, on reflection, are. This dynamism is central to ⿻. Rights support the democracies that rest on them and OSs support the applications that run on top of them. But the framers of rights and designers of OSs cannot anticipate (or cannot see except "[through a glass darkly](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2013%3A12&version=KJV)") how these foundations will be used, abused and reimagined, as different and sometimes adversarial actors harness (often through technological means) precisely the space they provide for such experimentation and innovation. The PRC’s [Great Firewall](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Firewall), for example, restricts and censors internet content, codifying authoritarianism. Yet, global social media platforms endemic to democracies today [have sometimes](https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/senatedocs/2/) auctioned the attention of their customers including with micro-targeting  for election interference and misinformation by adversaries.[^DiResta] Continued effective facilitation of democratic conversation will therefore require not just avoiding of censorship, but also of the sale of the attention economy to authoritarian influences, as highlighted by the recent international debate [over potential authoritarian influences](https://www.economist.com/business/2024/03/13/will-tiktok-still-exist-in-america) on the short-form video application, TikTok.[^EconomistTikTok]
+OSs are self-evidently dynamic, just as systems of rights, on reflection, are. This dynamism is central to ⿻. Rights support the democracies that rest on them and OSs support the applications that run on top of them. But the framers of rights and designers of OSs cannot anticipate (or cannot see except "[through a glass darkly](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2013%3A12&version=KJV)") how these foundations will be used, abused and reimagined, as different and sometimes adversarial actors harness (often through technological means) precisely the space they provide for such experimentation and innovation. The PRC’s [Great Firewall](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Firewall), for example, restricts and censors internet content, codifying authoritarianism. Yet, global social media platforms endemic to democracies today [have sometimes](https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/senatedocs/2/) auctioned the attention of their customers including with micro-targeting  for election interference and misinformation by adversaries.[^DiResta] Continued effective facilitation of democratic conversation will therefore require not just avoiding of censorship, but also of the sale of the attention economy to authoritarian influences, as highlighted by the recent international debate [over potential authoritarian influences](https://www.economist.com/business/2024/03/13/will-tiktok-still-exist-in-america) on the short-form video application, TikTok.[^EconomistTikTok]
 
 [^DiResta]: Renee DiResta, Kris Shaffer, Becky Ruppel, David Sullivan, Robert Matney, Ryan Fox, Jonathan Albright and Ben Johnson, "The Tactics & Tropes of the Internet Research Agency" (2019), presented to the Congress of the United States, available at https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/senatedocs/2/.
 [^EconomistTikTok]: *The Economist*, "Tick, Tock: Will TikTok Still Exist in America?" March 13, 2024.