4 ms·

I'd argue we already connected ourselves to computers, and we're just using the safest but slowest adapters available right now.

ElFitz 6y ago
We could argue on "safest", but definitely the compromise on speed, ease of use and safety that I can think of that I’m the most comfortable with
- qayxc 6y ago
  I'm curious, what would a solution look like that's even safer than a touch interface (mouse, keyboard, screen) or voice?
  - ElFitz 6y ago
    Well, removing audio and images, leaving only text, would make it safer. I, and probably many others, wouldn’t have stumbled upon some of the things I have. They thankfully are now only blurry memories to me, even though merely evoking them still is nauseating. It would also dramatically reduce the impact of much of the bullshit content out there, since words appear to have much less emotional impact than images (and appear to be much less appealing), and thus be safer to society as a whole. A text-only interface would also be much less useful and much more annoying to use.
    - all2 6y ago
      > since words appear to have much less emotional impact than images To some. My imagination is quite good and as a child I consumed vast quantities of print media. A lot of it wasn't appropriate for a child to consume.
      - jamiek88 6y ago
        Same here, as evidenced when one rainy Saturday afternoon the family were all together after lunch, grandparents drinking tea, me cross legged on the floor reading when I innocently asked the room “hey, what does cunt mean?’ Grandma turned puce and dad snatched the book from me, wtf are you reading? James Herbert’s Rats trilogy. Aged 8. Warped ever since. Text is plenty.
        spiralx 6y ago
        I couldn't understand why my parents didn't like me calling my brother an orgasm after I had read the term in a book and liked the sound of it :)
      - ElFitz 6y ago
        Sure. It can already be a lot. Some of my worst nightmares come from my own imagination. But we’re talking safer, not absolutely, perfectly safest. Also, how would you compare that to the close-up picture of an Iraqi soldier burned to a crisp by a Hellfire missile, hanging out of the carcass of his scorched vehicle, staring straight into your eyes with his charred, empty eye sockets? Or suddenly being confronted, at 12 years old, by dozens of neatly aligned child pornography thumbnails after clicking on some unclearly named link when exploring I2P, FreeNet and TOR because "decentralised", "anonymous" and "censorship-resistant" networks seemed "cool"? There’s a reason crap people’s magazines are full of pictures, paparazzi photos can be worth what they are, and websites with a photo of a smiling human (and a clear CTA) convert better than those without. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

ElFitz 6y ago

We could argue on "safest", but definitely the compromise on speed, ease of use and safety that I can think of that I’m the most comfortable with

qayxc 6y ago
I'm curious, what would a solution look like that's even safer than a touch interface (mouse, keyboard, screen) or voice?
- ElFitz 6y ago
  Well, removing audio and images, leaving only text, would make it safer. I, and probably many others, wouldn’t have stumbled upon some of the things I have. They thankfully are now only blurry memories to me, even though merely evoking them still is nauseating. It would also dramatically reduce the impact of much of the bullshit content out there, since words appear to have much less emotional impact than images (and appear to be much less appealing), and thus be safer to society as a whole. A text-only interface would also be much less useful and much more annoying to use.
  - all2 6y ago
    > since words appear to have much less emotional impact than images To some. My imagination is quite good and as a child I consumed vast quantities of print media. A lot of it wasn't appropriate for a child to consume.
    - jamiek88 6y ago
      Same here, as evidenced when one rainy Saturday afternoon the family were all together after lunch, grandparents drinking tea, me cross legged on the floor reading when I innocently asked the room “hey, what does cunt mean?’ Grandma turned puce and dad snatched the book from me, wtf are you reading? James Herbert’s Rats trilogy. Aged 8. Warped ever since. Text is plenty.
      - spiralx 6y ago
        I couldn't understand why my parents didn't like me calling my brother an orgasm after I had read the term in a book and liked the sound of it :)
    - ElFitz 6y ago
      Sure. It can already be a lot. Some of my worst nightmares come from my own imagination. But we’re talking safer, not absolutely, perfectly safest. Also, how would you compare that to the close-up picture of an Iraqi soldier burned to a crisp by a Hellfire missile, hanging out of the carcass of his scorched vehicle, staring straight into your eyes with his charred, empty eye sockets? Or suddenly being confronted, at 12 years old, by dozens of neatly aligned child pornography thumbnails after clicking on some unclearly named link when exploring I2P, FreeNet and TOR because "decentralised", "anonymous" and "censorship-resistant" networks seemed "cool"? There’s a reason crap people’s magazines are full of pictures, paparazzi photos can be worth what they are, and websites with a photo of a smiling human (and a clear CTA) convert better than those without. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]