4 ms·

That's reductio ad absurdum ... a logical fallacy. It's like saying restrictions on digital child pornography are doomed to failure because they're about contro

That's reductio ad absurdum ... a logical fallacy. It's like saying restrictions on digital child pornography are doomed to failure because they're about controlling certain bit strings. But as it turns out, people involved in that kind of stuff get identified; get arrested; go to prison; and society abhors and rejects their behavior.

Joeboy 5y ago
I don't think reductio ad absurdum is normally considered a logical fallacy? Maybe it's more like the fallacy of composition.
- NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
  You're right; it's only an informal fallacy; my bad!
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    It's not a fallacy of any kind. It's a form of logical argument. If A implies B and B is absurd then A is absurd.
  - rfd4sgmk8u 5y ago
    Whats the fallacy called when CSAM is used as an argument by authoritarians wanting to ban math?
    - NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
      I have literally no idea what you're talking about; but the fallacy that's about implying someones argument is bad because they're a bad person is called ad hominem, HTH HAND.
      - rfd4sgmk8u 5y ago
        I think you do. It's appeal to emotion, and appeal to authority. HAND
        Joeboy 5y ago
        Do you not think it's possible some people genuinely don't want children to be assaulted, and perhaps (in some cases) care more about that then they do about the sanctity of mathematics or whatever? Perhaps I'm naive but it seems likely to me that there would be a lot more people like that than people who are cynically utilizing the CSAM argument to pursue a deep-seated loathing of mathematics.
        rfd4sgmk8u 5y ago
        Anytime somebody tries to illustrate the futility of banning math, they are confronted with this argument. It is the same argument that has been used for DECADES at this point to continuously erode digital freedoms. There are countless memes documenting this through the Internet ages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp... There is no good faith outcome that can continue from this, it shuts down the argument. Good day.
        Joeboy 5y ago
        Well, I'm suspecting "CSAM is used as an argument by authoritarians wanting to ban math" wasn't really a good faith argument either. Either way good day to you too.
reginold 5y ago
Restrictions on digital child pornography do seem doomed to failure. It's why the FBI et al keep asking for backdoors and anti-encryption, and why Apple is adding CSAM scanning on device.
- NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
  You're missing the point. How many people would be "doing cryptocurrency" if it were as strong regulated against as child pornography? Some minuscule number, I would imagine; at which point how interesting or useful would it be? You don't have to drive something to zero to restrict it successfully.
  - reginold 5y ago
    Hmm good question. Let's say Bitcoin was strongly regulated globally. Anyone caught running mining software or transacting in Bitcoin has their hands cut off. Ouch. I can still download mining software and run it on my computer, and connect through the network through Tor. Blocks are 1 MB every 15 minutes, it's noise. I don't need to know anyone or have anyone's identities. It's really really hard to catch me. Like, wayyyyy harder than the child pornography example. Well, ok but what's the incentive then for me to use Bitcoin in such a world? Not sure there, like what's the "USD price" per Bitcoin. Ya this part seems tough. If all countries strongly ban Bitcoin with harsh penalties, that seems like it would put a kabosh on my ability to turn it into real world currency. But still could be used for digital goods.
    - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
      > If all countries strongly ban Bitcoin with harsh penalties, that seems like it would put a kabosh on my ability to turn it into real world currency. You're forgetting black markets. Drug dealers and gun runners and human traffickers are already breaking serious laws. They don't care about breaking other laws. If they get caught they're already going to jail whether they use illegal math or not. The lack of utility also assumes that all countries would ban it, which seems unlikely, if only because some countries have the incentive to do anything they can to stick it to other countries they don't like. Then it still retains value globally because it can be turned into real stuff in those countries. The real issue is this: You can't ban it for the "bad stuff" that gets used as the excuse to ban it, because those guys will just break the law, as they already do. You can ban it for innocent people using it for innocent things, but that's just stupid. Or corrupt, because incumbents don't like the competition, which is the strongest driving force for such laws.
beaner 5y ago
Is this really a proper analogy? Child pornography is the content and the internet is the medium. For what OP is talking about, cryptography is the medium, not the content. We're moving towards banning the medium here, and what types of legitimate content enabled by it will we be throwing out?

Joeboy 5y ago

I don't think reductio ad absurdum is normally considered a logical fallacy? Maybe it's more like the fallacy of composition.

NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
You're right; it's only an informal fallacy; my bad!
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  It's not a fallacy of any kind. It's a form of logical argument. If A implies B and B is absurd then A is absurd.
- rfd4sgmk8u 5y ago
  Whats the fallacy called when CSAM is used as an argument by authoritarians wanting to ban math?
  - NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
    I have literally no idea what you're talking about; but the fallacy that's about implying someones argument is bad because they're a bad person is called ad hominem, HTH HAND.
    - rfd4sgmk8u 5y ago
      I think you do. It's appeal to emotion, and appeal to authority. HAND
      - Joeboy 5y ago
        Do you not think it's possible some people genuinely don't want children to be assaulted, and perhaps (in some cases) care more about that then they do about the sanctity of mathematics or whatever? Perhaps I'm naive but it seems likely to me that there would be a lot more people like that than people who are cynically utilizing the CSAM argument to pursue a deep-seated loathing of mathematics.
        rfd4sgmk8u 5y ago
        Anytime somebody tries to illustrate the futility of banning math, they are confronted with this argument. It is the same argument that has been used for DECADES at this point to continuously erode digital freedoms. There are countless memes documenting this through the Internet ages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp... There is no good faith outcome that can continue from this, it shuts down the argument. Good day.
        Joeboy 5y ago
        Well, I'm suspecting "CSAM is used as an argument by authoritarians wanting to ban math" wasn't really a good faith argument either. Either way good day to you too.

reginold 5y ago

Restrictions on digital child pornography do seem doomed to failure. It's why the FBI et al keep asking for backdoors and anti-encryption, and why Apple is adding CSAM scanning on device.

NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
You're missing the point. How many people would be "doing cryptocurrency" if it were as strong regulated against as child pornography? Some minuscule number, I would imagine; at which point how interesting or useful would it be? You don't have to drive something to zero to restrict it successfully.
- reginold 5y ago
  Hmm good question. Let's say Bitcoin was strongly regulated globally. Anyone caught running mining software or transacting in Bitcoin has their hands cut off. Ouch. I can still download mining software and run it on my computer, and connect through the network through Tor. Blocks are 1 MB every 15 minutes, it's noise. I don't need to know anyone or have anyone's identities. It's really really hard to catch me. Like, wayyyyy harder than the child pornography example. Well, ok but what's the incentive then for me to use Bitcoin in such a world? Not sure there, like what's the "USD price" per Bitcoin. Ya this part seems tough. If all countries strongly ban Bitcoin with harsh penalties, that seems like it would put a kabosh on my ability to turn it into real world currency. But still could be used for digital goods.
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    > If all countries strongly ban Bitcoin with harsh penalties, that seems like it would put a kabosh on my ability to turn it into real world currency. You're forgetting black markets. Drug dealers and gun runners and human traffickers are already breaking serious laws. They don't care about breaking other laws. If they get caught they're already going to jail whether they use illegal math or not. The lack of utility also assumes that all countries would ban it, which seems unlikely, if only because some countries have the incentive to do anything they can to stick it to other countries they don't like. Then it still retains value globally because it can be turned into real stuff in those countries. The real issue is this: You can't ban it for the "bad stuff" that gets used as the excuse to ban it, because those guys will just break the law, as they already do. You can ban it for innocent people using it for innocent things, but that's just stupid. Or corrupt, because incumbents don't like the competition, which is the strongest driving force for such laws.

beaner 5y ago

Is this really a proper analogy? Child pornography is the content and the internet is the medium. For what OP is talking about, cryptography is the medium, not the content. We're moving towards banning the medium here, and what types of legitimate content enabled by it will we be throwing out?