this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
383 points (98.5% liked)
Technology
59201 readers
4225 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
its always "protect children" or "terrorism"/"national security"
And then they lower the age that kids can get married to 14/15 (pedos!), and change labor laws so pre-teens can work in dangerous jobs or serve alcohol.
If they want to protect "children", we need Xtra restrictive gun laws, and child abuse laws. Who protects children from abuse at home?
Not conservatives, they are the ones behind all this.
Except when it's guns
It is absolutely always one of those two, and they try this shit every session. Better solution? Kick any politician who signs off on these bills out of office and make it crystal clear that they've been booted because they're anti-speech and anti-privacy.
Why old men are so obsessed with kids? Are they pedo or something?
It's never about kids. If they gave half a fuck about kids, we'd have free school lunches and teachers would be paid a fair salary.
So long as the internet is around to distribute fact-checks and officer-involved homicide videos they have no plausible lies by which the 80% of us in poverty or precarity should tolerate the abuse of plutocrats and capitalists.
So this is a first amendment issue: it's about suppression of political speech. It always was 🌍 👩🚀 🔫 👨🚀 🌑
every time they say it's to "protect the children" or "protect freedom" it is invariably neither.
Fine, so who will be judging if there's a depressive content on the internet, a psychologist? Also how about non-US sites, will they be banned or something?
Perhaps politicians should concentrate on making it so there's less depressing stuff in the world for anyone to see and hear, and not creating more of it with things like this rubbish bill. 🤷♀️
woah no way
in other news, every sixty seconds in Africa, a minute passes.
Isn't this also the bill that could screw up encryption too?
Culturally we're going back to the Middle Ages...
Specifically the Dark Ages.
it has nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with destroying privacy
Isn't it something that China has been doing for a while? In their version, it's called 'spreading positive energy'.
It's almost like everything the US said about China was just a projection of their own insecurities.
It might get to a point where China actually is relatively more liberating than "stable democracies" in internet access.
What else is new?
This doesn't seem different from what many if not most major platforms are already doing voluntarily. Just replace the word "depressing" with the word "toxic" and suddenly everyone will support this.
Protect kids from guns would be better.
Jack O'Neil's son would still be alive today if he didn't get a hold of his father's gun. But then we wouldn't have Stargate. It's sort of a toss up to me.
This headline could have been written 20 years ago.
Maybe the Internet was a mistake ?
Maybe leaving the trees was a mistake.
Good luck with that. They can't even stop child abuse online and that's an actual problem that should be solved.
Dunno why you're being downvoted