It is very uncharitable, because you are cherry-picking things, I cant not write the complexity of life in a post. Your making up stuff that I havent stated.
And poeple who shouldn't have kids do have kids, that is reality. And even if you ave parents that are not the ideal parent, do you think kids should suffer for that. Because in the real world we do laws that are only ment to protect people from stuff that is harmful.
So you are advokating that alcohol should not have legal age limit, because parents are responsible for their kids? Seatbelts why have laws for that, drugs, hey because you as a person and kid, parent should know it's bad.
Why even have school be mandatory, parents are responsible to teach their kids how to read and write (because that has worked great right).
The solution is simple but there's not enough political motivation to do anything, there is more incentive to do bare minimum. regulate marketing on the internet, enact laws that prohibits intrusive marketing ad platforms.
I understand what your trying to say, but realize we have probably vast amount of laws today that only exist to protect people and children on the same basis i'm arguing.
Think about anything that is harmful and illegal, we can say well, you as a person should know that you shouldn't eat moldy meat, so why do we need laws for selling moldy meat. (bad example, but you can probably find a better one)
Also reflect about the legal process and how do they compare. For example if you start a beer brand and market towards minors via different ways ( or another product that is definitely illegal), vs you own huge social platform which you market towards kids, but you platform has ads or content that is illegal to market in traditional media. I would guess that your beer company would automatically end up in court via existing court processes, and the social media platform might be sued by private citizens and if they are lucky they might settle out of court.
And why is that? Why do we have a bunch of protection laws for simpler things, that I would consider is easier for a parent to understand and educate their children about and say we as a society have to take the responsibility to ensure that kids or grownups have vast amount of protection.
if we expect parents to SOLE responsibility for what their kids are doing online and what they are subjected to, then why would we not require the same for other things that are illegal today, alcohol tobacco, driving a car, not wearing seatbelt etc..
How much money do we spend to educate people on drugs and alcohol harms, compared to harms of internet?
Personal opinion, we have all been lobbied that platforms don't have same responsibilities to ensure that they benefit society. our opinions don't come out of the thin air, they spend huge (billions of billion world over) amount of money to shape laws and public opinion, this is more or less a fact.
And of they can't, because they can't. Every parent is not the ideal parent and will never be, heck there's parents who are retarded (in the literal sense).
But lets say it's the average tech illiterate parent, who thinks computers are a gaming machine for kids. Imagine the amount of social engineering and how the marketing departments of companies trying to make kids addicted to their platform. The industries are pouring trillions of dollars in marketing, are you confident that regular parents have a chance of competing with them?
i'm in no way of supporting this because it's done for other nefarious reason, just commenting on the troupe that parents is responsible for their own kids. We can say that all day, but the reality is that they don't know what impact it has on their kids mental health and how damaging short term dopamine addiction is for their children. Society is still responsible to help parents navigate healthy behavior for their children.
Tbh if children was the concern of this law, then you would allow parents to sue tiktok and other platforms that have made their children addicted to the platform. You should also be able to sue influencers for promoting stuff to children (they know the age of their userbase).
Still parenting is hard, especially when you are competing with phds in behavioral science or psychologists that help these platforms design their addiction mechanism.
What is considered not cheaping out on psu? because the price range can be 50-100 euro more depending on the model for the same effect. I usually buy the bronze standard and that the components are made in japan or korea.
You are making an argument against your own point of lesser evils, we are debating if the overtone window has shifted. Which is obvious that it has. As I stated before media is owned by the wealthy even state owned media is controlled by the wealthy, they set the narrative, why do you think that they write and talk about super predators, so that becomes the agenda. And not that coperate america is fucking over the working class, and the politicians aren't doing jack shit about it.
Why does it have to be 70 years? Can we do 10 20 30? Then I don't believe the overtone window is that obvious 30-40 years ago you were considered bad if you bought a right wing newspaper, people would stop talking to you. (Well at least where I am from)
Coincidentally that is the period where workers had the most rights, which has slowly become worse with time in every western country.
At that time they thought right wing people where against them having rights and quiet evil, they had been thought by their parents, who worked hard for those rights. Our generation has not learned the importance and given more room for the right wing to control our media, which then controls the narrative. Why is there so many articles about trump or Elon musk, I mean we have two idiots who cares, do we have to know that trump misspelled coffee?
No but why should I, why is this the most important problem that should consume my time and energy, while there are 1000 of other global problems. Mass starvation, war, poverty, racism, anti trans, Eco terrorism, getting fucked by politicians. What is so bad in new York for trans people, is it forbidden to be trans, I actually don't know because I don't live there, but it seems like it has a healthy community?
Okej but why do you want to define a human person or whatever, in this scenario? I don't care about cis/trans or anything, I don't identify as cis or man or woman. But grouping people based on things they have no choice in and then telling them because you are born like this, it's your responsibility to do whatever I ask of you, sounds weird to me. People are dealing with their own issues as people who identify as trans are.
Yes. Let's take your personal anecdote and make it policy. People can just fix the environment to be accepted, change the world for the better and stuff like that.
You don't even need cameras, you need rails on the ground you know, car follows the rails. Also a driver maybe, if you have a driver it should work, you tell the driver where you want to go, they take you there.
Otherwise, you also can try a global satellite mesh, connected to laser squirrels that can tell the satellites what to follow, then it tells you have how to drive.
But you need at least a nuclear power plant to run your setup, 59 giga server farms that are on high pressure, high fule mode.
I just mean they own it, I know that you can't decrypt encrypted messages with root certificate, but you can abuse it in the case of being man in the middle. Of course I don't think that let's encrypt are doing that, but there other entities that would really enjoy having that toolset for hundred of millions of services that rely on let's encrypt.
And if you look at the ones who sponsor Lets encrypt, I don't think that any of them would bat an eye (except for EFF) if for instance the pedophile chief decided that they need to change leadership. Or hey, we NSA also have access to the credentials to the root certificate.
Something being free is not always the best option, when it comes to security. And it's not impossible that such a large entity can become compromised through pressure, especially when they live on support from private organizations, who have time and time again, shown that they are not trust worthy and would choose to do unethical thing, if that benefits them.
And the developer who spent time on this, should just listen to you, because you are an expert on games that people want to play. Like McDonald's is the only restaurant you need. I hope he doesn't listen to morons though
Well they did, it's called switch. Otherwise they've could keep the gameboy for all their handheld devices.
What? She is a kurd, might be a jewish kurd, but a kurd first. Every kurd knows that.
It is very uncharitable, because you are cherry-picking things, I cant not write the complexity of life in a post. Your making up stuff that I havent stated.
And poeple who shouldn't have kids do have kids, that is reality. And even if you ave parents that are not the ideal parent, do you think kids should suffer for that. Because in the real world we do laws that are only ment to protect people from stuff that is harmful.
So you are advokating that alcohol should not have legal age limit, because parents are responsible for their kids? Seatbelts why have laws for that, drugs, hey because you as a person and kid, parent should know it's bad.
Why even have school be mandatory, parents are responsible to teach their kids how to read and write (because that has worked great right).
this is how you argue.
The solution is simple but there's not enough political motivation to do anything, there is more incentive to do bare minimum. regulate marketing on the internet, enact laws that prohibits intrusive marketing ad platforms.
I understand what your trying to say, but realize we have probably vast amount of laws today that only exist to protect people and children on the same basis i'm arguing.
Think about anything that is harmful and illegal, we can say well, you as a person should know that you shouldn't eat moldy meat, so why do we need laws for selling moldy meat. (bad example, but you can probably find a better one)
Also reflect about the legal process and how do they compare. For example if you start a beer brand and market towards minors via different ways ( or another product that is definitely illegal), vs you own huge social platform which you market towards kids, but you platform has ads or content that is illegal to market in traditional media. I would guess that your beer company would automatically end up in court via existing court processes, and the social media platform might be sued by private citizens and if they are lucky they might settle out of court.
And why is that? Why do we have a bunch of protection laws for simpler things, that I would consider is easier for a parent to understand and educate their children about and say we as a society have to take the responsibility to ensure that kids or grownups have vast amount of protection.
if we expect parents to SOLE responsibility for what their kids are doing online and what they are subjected to, then why would we not require the same for other things that are illegal today, alcohol tobacco, driving a car, not wearing seatbelt etc..
How much money do we spend to educate people on drugs and alcohol harms, compared to harms of internet?
Personal opinion, we have all been lobbied that platforms don't have same responsibilities to ensure that they benefit society. our opinions don't come out of the thin air, they spend huge (billions of billion world over) amount of money to shape laws and public opinion, this is more or less a fact.
And of they can't, because they can't. Every parent is not the ideal parent and will never be, heck there's parents who are retarded (in the literal sense).
But lets say it's the average tech illiterate parent, who thinks computers are a gaming machine for kids. Imagine the amount of social engineering and how the marketing departments of companies trying to make kids addicted to their platform. The industries are pouring trillions of dollars in marketing, are you confident that regular parents have a chance of competing with them?
i'm in no way of supporting this because it's done for other nefarious reason, just commenting on the troupe that parents is responsible for their own kids. We can say that all day, but the reality is that they don't know what impact it has on their kids mental health and how damaging short term dopamine addiction is for their children. Society is still responsible to help parents navigate healthy behavior for their children.
Tbh if children was the concern of this law, then you would allow parents to sue tiktok and other platforms that have made their children addicted to the platform. You should also be able to sue influencers for promoting stuff to children (they know the age of their userbase).
Still parenting is hard, especially when you are competing with phds in behavioral science or psychologists that help these platforms design their addiction mechanism.
What is considered not cheaping out on psu? because the price range can be 50-100 euro more depending on the model for the same effect. I usually buy the bronze standard and that the components are made in japan or korea.
Europe = Germany, otherwise its paris or spain, italy is an island next to new york
You are making an argument against your own point of lesser evils, we are debating if the overtone window has shifted. Which is obvious that it has. As I stated before media is owned by the wealthy even state owned media is controlled by the wealthy, they set the narrative, why do you think that they write and talk about super predators, so that becomes the agenda. And not that coperate america is fucking over the working class, and the politicians aren't doing jack shit about it.
Why does it have to be 70 years? Can we do 10 20 30? Then I don't believe the overtone window is that obvious 30-40 years ago you were considered bad if you bought a right wing newspaper, people would stop talking to you. (Well at least where I am from)
Coincidentally that is the period where workers had the most rights, which has slowly become worse with time in every western country.
At that time they thought right wing people where against them having rights and quiet evil, they had been thought by their parents, who worked hard for those rights. Our generation has not learned the importance and given more room for the right wing to control our media, which then controls the narrative. Why is there so many articles about trump or Elon musk, I mean we have two idiots who cares, do we have to know that trump misspelled coffee?
No but why should I, why is this the most important problem that should consume my time and energy, while there are 1000 of other global problems. Mass starvation, war, poverty, racism, anti trans, Eco terrorism, getting fucked by politicians. What is so bad in new York for trans people, is it forbidden to be trans, I actually don't know because I don't live there, but it seems like it has a healthy community?
What the fuck is a trans person and a cis person?
Okej but why do you want to define a human person or whatever, in this scenario? I don't care about cis/trans or anything, I don't identify as cis or man or woman. But grouping people based on things they have no choice in and then telling them because you are born like this, it's your responsibility to do whatever I ask of you, sounds weird to me. People are dealing with their own issues as people who identify as trans are.
You say zucchini to eggplant, isn't zucchini another vegetable (green).
Yes. Let's take your personal anecdote and make it policy. People can just fix the environment to be accepted, change the world for the better and stuff like that.
Your ADHD is not the same as another persons.
You don't even need cameras, you need rails on the ground you know, car follows the rails. Also a driver maybe, if you have a driver it should work, you tell the driver where you want to go, they take you there.
Otherwise, you also can try a global satellite mesh, connected to laser squirrels that can tell the satellites what to follow, then it tells you have how to drive. But you need at least a nuclear power plant to run your setup, 59 giga server farms that are on high pressure, high fule mode.
I just mean they own it, I know that you can't decrypt encrypted messages with root certificate, but you can abuse it in the case of being man in the middle. Of course I don't think that let's encrypt are doing that, but there other entities that would really enjoy having that toolset for hundred of millions of services that rely on let's encrypt.
And if you look at the ones who sponsor Lets encrypt, I don't think that any of them would bat an eye (except for EFF) if for instance the pedophile chief decided that they need to change leadership. Or hey, we NSA also have access to the credentials to the root certificate.
Something being free is not always the best option, when it comes to security. And it's not impossible that such a large entity can become compromised through pressure, especially when they live on support from private organizations, who have time and time again, shown that they are not trust worthy and would choose to do unethical thing, if that benefits them.
And who owns the root certificate?
And the developer who spent time on this, should just listen to you, because you are an expert on games that people want to play. Like McDonald's is the only restaurant you need. I hope he doesn't listen to morons though