281–290 of 448 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it is recommended not to employ sarcasm when counterpoints are easily available
Unfortunately, when counterpoints are easily available, I expect the person to have already thought of them, hence the sarcasm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a peer / social issue at play as well though. If you believe that smart phones are disastrous for kids (I happen to think so), and don't allow your 13yo daughter to have one, you are pretty much forcing her to be the odd one out. Maybe that's OK for some parents, but you can't deny that this cost exists. Preventing your son from playing certain video games that all of his friends enjoy also has a social cost.…
So does being vegetarian or vegan. So does being not the dominant culture in any aspect of life. That's a decision for parents to make and honestly "they'll be left out" is such a crap parenting take. Especially since it's a bunch of parents together who don't want their kid to have access thinking this together. If they actually talked to each each or just made a stand so people could see, we wouldn't even have this…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many countries (including in the EU) already required ID to use a SIM card: https://forestvpn.com/blog/news/countries-sim-card-registrat... Funnily enough, when the Philippines did this, it was decried as a violation of human rights [1]. But usually, media are so silent on such things I'd call them complicit. One already cannot so much as rent a hotel room anywhere in the EU without showing government ID. [1] https:/…
I'm in NL and had my wallet fall out of my pocket once at one of the bigger train stations. I realized within ~5 minutes, and basically as soon as I realized got a call from an anonymous number. It was the police, who had found my wallet with my ID in it and were calling me to inform me about it. Luckily I was still at the station and could just meet them and got my wallet back. I couldn't help but feel extremely cre…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, when counterpoints are easily available, I expect the person to have already thought of them, hence the sarcasm.
Edited to delete my comment. I was mistaken about who was replying to who. As such my comment was entirely wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but if the goal is to minimise access to violence, why did the GP say "they can access porn" instead of "they can access violence"? I doubt the two are synonymous.
They're not synonymous but a vast amount of pornography available online constitutes violence against women. The commercial sex trade, including both porn and prostitution, is a multi-billion dollar industry that seeks to normalize extreme acts and promotes the dehumanisation of women and girls.
e.g. a site wants to have some proof of identity. it generates a token and sends the user with it to a government service. the service verifies the user's identity, signs the token and sends the user back.
now the site knows that the government service has verified the identity (and relevant characteristics, like age threshold), but doesn't know the identity. the government service obviously knows the user but doesn't know the online account tied to the identity. this can be further separated by using a middleman authentication provider, so that even the site identity itself doesn't reach the government.
am i missing something obvious why that wouldn't work?
A long, long time ago (within the past ten years), I had to verify my age with a site. They didn't ask for my ID, or my facial scan, but instead asked for my credit card number. They issued a refund to the card of a few cents, and I had to tell them (within 24hr) how much the refund was for, after which point they'd issue a charge to claw it back. They made it clear that debit and gift cards would not be accepted, it…
why wouldn't an identity/age verification scheme that blinds both sides work? e.g. a site wants to have some proof of identity. it generates a token and sends the user with it to a government service. the service verifies the user's identity, signs the token and sends the user back. now the site knows that the government service has verified the identity (and relevant characteristics, like age threshold), but doesn't…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, when counterpoints are easily available, I expect the person to have already thought of them, hence the sarcasm.
Edited to delete my comment. I was mistaken about who was replying to who. As such my comment was entirely wrong.
The most specific he gets is "furry porn", which might be a kink you don't approve of but is not obviously more objectionable than "people having sex".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Edited to delete my comment. I was mistaken about who was replying to who. As such my comment was entirely wrong.
Please point me to where the original comment mentioned anything about violence.