Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 485 posts

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#231

Post by hot_gril »

BrawnyBadger53 wrote: post #223
hot_gril wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also why "ad hominem" can be legit. Lawmakers' personal beliefs and incentives say a lot more than whatever generic arguments they pick.

This is less true, slippery slope as a fallacy is having large unclear jumps chained together to make a really improbable outcome because each improbable chain scales off all the previous pieces. But ad hominem as an argument is only really valid when the attack against the person is highlighting conflicts of interest, which is more reason for scrutiny of the original argument than it is cause for ignoring it entirel…

That's what the opponent wants you to do. The law by itself looks ok, but you're dealing with limited information, mainly not knowing how they're going to use it next.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#232

Post by kerkeslager »

ty6853 wrote: post #193
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions If you’re afraid of the monster under your bed, the solution isn’t to clench you teeth—it’s to learn there’s no monster. Recognising the bias is good. We all have subconscious biases based on fear and disgust. But the solution is to learn more about the thing so it stops triggering a reptilian response.

Yes I agree 100%, although I admit the reptilian response might never fully attenuate. Which leads me to, is public nudity/display of sex something we feel is wrong based on fear or disgust? Or because there is a scientific basis of degraded life outcomes? There can be health hazards in say most indoor spaces but for say printed material those biohazard don't exist. I'm seeking to find if I'm being a reptile here.

I think it's not even reptilian--it's cultural (assuming you're from the US) based in the American history of Puritanism and related strains of Christianity. There are a ton of human cultures that don't vilify nudity. Germany, for example, has a much more relaxed attitude toward nudity.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#233

Post by JumpCrisscross »

d0mine wrote: post #198
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions If you’re afraid of the monster under your bed, the solution isn’t to clench you teeth—it’s to learn there’s no monster. Recognising the bias is good. We all have subconscious biases based on fear and disgust. But the solution is to learn more about the thing so it stops triggering a reptilian response.

what do you think an unbiased heterosexual man should feel stumbling upon two men kissing in public?

> what do you think an unbiased heterosexual man should feel stumbling upon two men kissing in public?

Nothing? Maybe an aww? What do you feel when you see animals nuzzling each other? Or kids in the park doing their thing?

If you felt disgust or fear in response to seeing a man and a woman of a specific race kiss, how would you respond to yourself?

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#234

Post by kerkeslager »

slg wrote: post #228
d0mine wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what do you think an unbiased heterosexual man should feel stumbling upon two men kissing in public?

[flagged]

> Is the implication of this question that a heterosexual man should be aroused whenever they see a heterosexual couple kissing?

This kind of wild accusation doesn't further the conversation. What the person you've responded to said is off base enough without you accusing him of saying random things that aren't there.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#235

Post by ty6853 »

slg wrote: post #229
theoreticalmal wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Tolerance means little if it's about stuff that you have nothing but good or neutral opinions and feelings about.

The virtue of tolerance is accepting that which gives you unpleasant opinions or feelings. This is the kind of tolerance that actually takes meaningful effort to develop.

You're limiting tolerance to a form where it has little to no value.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#236

Post by kerkeslager »

slg wrote: post #188
wegfawefgawefg wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not reasonable. That doesnt make him prejudiced. He just likes bananas and doesnt like natto. I dont want to see morbidly obese people naked either, its gross to me.

>That doesnt make him prejudiced It is literally the dictionary definition of prejudice. From Merriam-Webster[1]: >1. b (1) - an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge They directly said "two dudes kissing... feels wrong to me but when I try to come up with an explanation I have none." That is an "adverse opinion" they immediately admit to holding "without just grounds".…

A strategic tip: he doesn't care that he's prejudiced, so showing he's prejudiced doesn't do much.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#238

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ty6853 wrote: post #193
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions If you’re afraid of the monster under your bed, the solution isn’t to clench you teeth—it’s to learn there’s no monster. Recognising the bias is good. We all have subconscious biases based on fear and disgust. But the solution is to learn more about the thing so it stops triggering a reptilian response.

Yes I agree 100%, although I admit the reptilian response might never fully attenuate. Which leads me to, is public nudity/display of sex something we feel is wrong based on fear or disgust? Or because there is a scientific basis of degraded life outcomes? There can be health hazards in say most indoor spaces but for say printed material those biohazard don't exist. I'm seeking to find if I'm being a reptile here.

> although I admit the reptilian response might never fully attenuate

That’s fine. The problem is in the bits between your senses and the reptilian brain. When a kid screams for their iPad on a plane, the reptilian part of their brain is legitimately freaking out. You’re not going to ever shut that off. But the adults in their life should attempt to disconnect it from the stimulus.m

If you’ve genuinely never overcome a fear or disgust, this could be a rewarding learning opportunity. Go to a pride event.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#239

Post by me-vs-cat »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #185
ty6853 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions and reason your response.

> Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions If you’re afraid of the monster under your bed, the solution isn’t to clench you teeth—it’s to learn there’s no monster. Recognising the bias is good. We all have subconscious biases based on fear and disgust. But the solution is to learn more about the thing so it stops triggering a reptilian response.

> But the solution is to learn more about the thing so it stops triggering a reptilian response.

That takes time or may never happen, even in the best cases. In the meantime, clenched teeth sounds exactly like what they should do, as they prevent subconscious bias from controlling conscious decisions.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#240

Post by haswell »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #170
haswell wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The 20th century internet had boobs Porn on the Internet today isn’t like it was either.

There is more of it now, certainly. Is it worse than goatse?

More of it yes, but the themes and extremes have been shifting over the years as well, with family fantasies and misogyny/sexual violence becoming increasingly prevalent.

This was actually on the front page recently [0], and while I'm no prude, I do think it's worth taking the trends in porn seriously when comparing the old Internet to the current day.

- [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43196585

Post reply on HN