41–50 of 84 posts
Zero science, zero research, just politicians restricting citizens rights.
All of this would be easier if we just called Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and all the others by a more correct name: “Sales-acceleration platforms” and it's mode of operation is "inducing emotional instability in consumers". “Sales-acceleration platforms” should be regulated to protect consumers, no? Also, why do children need to be on “Sales-acceleration platforms”?
Will they consult any of the under-16s they're targeting? Or just those who "know what's best"
Zero science, zero research, just politicians restricting citizens rights.
Wrong. Meta has years of very well documented practices that are fundamentally detrimental to society when not clearly illegal. Explain why politicians, which have not acted enough to avoid that, now should not act to limit the issue. This line of thinking is detrimental and only defends the concentration of wealth that the online platform came to represent. You should be the one doing some more research, I reckon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The UK has had a great firewall for decades - try going to a kiddie porn site or a torrent site and you will be unable to connect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_blocking_in_the_United_Kin...
Did you just equate a social media ban and torrenting to... child pornography?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What amused me is shortly after cutting the UK off from pornhub etc, the UK then tried to ban porn sites from porn with strangling -- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyk3qzq7k7o If they had instead gone on a "porn sites that would obey the ID law need to flag themselves via this system and ISPs/phone providers should block them by default and only the account holder can enable it", then they would actually have…
Or they could consciously choose to not bypass the restrictions and to not consume pornography. If they are seeking out vile material like incest, animal rape and sexualised murder then the blame lays entirely on them, not the government. I mean what is even your point? Male depravity is unavoidable, and men are mindless ejaculators with no free will to curb abnormal sexual behaviours?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What amused me is shortly after cutting the UK off from pornhub etc, the UK then tried to ban porn sites from porn with strangling -- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyk3qzq7k7o If they had instead gone on a "porn sites that would obey the ID law need to flag themselves via this system and ISPs/phone providers should block them by default and only the account holder can enable it", then they would actually have…
Or they could consciously choose to not bypass the restrictions and to not consume pornography. If they are seeking out vile material like incest, animal rape and sexualised murder then the blame lays entirely on them, not the government. I mean what is even your point? Male depravity is unavoidable, and men are mindless ejaculators with no free will to curb abnormal sexual behaviours?
You turn people off the professional sites which can be held accountable and they end up on the dark side of the internet.
America saw the same thing when the puritans banned alcohol last century, people ran right into the arms of organised crime.
Will they consult any of the under-16s they're targeting? Or just those who "know what's best"