2 ms·
You seem to have picked " Or anything goes, no law" which as stated above, is not acceptable to the EU. Naïve libertarian takes like "let adults make their own
by SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
You seem to have picked " Or anything goes, no law" which as stated above, is not acceptable to the EU.
Naïve libertarian takes like "let adults make their own informed decisions" are all fine and well, but when there's a track record of their harm that can be pointed to already, it is, as stated, a non-starter.
You do know how that worked out so far, right?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebook-genocide.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebo...
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-facebooks-systems-promoted-violence-against-rohingya-meta-owes-reparations-new-report/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-faceb...
Your position is an ideology, and it is one with a poor track record; you're welcome to it, but thankfully you're not going to force it on Europe.
- scarface74 3y agoSo should we now pass laws that outlaw everything that can cause you harm - cigarettes? Alcohol? Gambling? Sugar? Do you also support the “war on drugs”? How much power do you want to give the government because you are incapable of making your own decisions?
- SideburnsOfDoom 3y agoThis is a very silly straw man argument, and I'm getting whiplash from the continual changes of topic in search of a valid point.
- scarface74 3y agoHow so? The contention was that the government should protect intelligent adults because they are too dumb to use their own judgment. But adults are intelligent enough to use alcohol in responsible way (which statistically is clearly not the case), but not intelligent enough to use a social media platform?