4 ms·

People were panicking about opioid abuse in the 80s therefore concerns about fentanyl today are invalid. People were worried about computer security 30 years a

by dmm 2y ago

People were panicking about opioid abuse in the 80s therefore concerns about fentanyl today are invalid. People were worried about computer security 30 years ago therefore computer security is nothing to worry about today. Russian aggression was a concern throughout the 20th century yet we are still here, Ukraine shouldn't worry so much. What is this general form of argument called? Appeal to nothing-ever-happens?

dj_mc_merlin 2y ago
Your examples are decades old. People have been worrying about technology spoiling their children since we've had writing. Are you arguing you were ruined by TVs and computers growing up? Or satanic music?
- cheeseomlit 2y ago
  Are you arguing that TVs and computers are not capable of ruining lives? There are a legion of washed up WoW addicts that would indicate they can, to name one example
- atonse 2y ago
  The difference is that those other technologies weren't fine tuned to individuals to literally short-circuit their brains to get the most perfect amount of dopamine at the right time to keep them addicted. People aren't getting addicted as a side-effect. Addiction is the primary-effect of the way the companies have designed these experiences, and addition (or the more harmless term "customer engagement") is a direct measure of success at these companies. So the analogy breaks down pretty quickly. They're more like Slot machines, which are highly regulated and age-gated.
- rightbyte 2y ago
  Instagram's Tik Tok rip off, Youtube's Tik Tok rip off, the original to some extent etc are way worse than whatever we grew up with. At least I believe so. It is just a gut feeling though. Like, it is poison due to the manipulative algorithmic feeds, or something. Like how Facebook turned into a genocide enabler in 2013 something when they added their crappy non chronological feed. The format in it self is probably OK, as in, short amusing videos.
zer00eyz 2y ago
Parents have been complaining about books, tv, radio... If your an American of a certain age Tipper gore was complaining about music corrupting children.... Moving the goal posts all the time is a terrible means to form an argument.
- partiallypro 2y ago
  When your kid is reading a book, watching TV, radio, playing a video game, etc you still have a -general- idea of what the kid is into. When it comes to something like TikTok, YouTube, etc they are one swipe away from literally anything. I don't think a kid 5-7 years of age can truly grasp it. I've been very online for a long time, but I don't think that really started until I was 15 or so. A 5-7 year old kid having access to certain thing is just awful parenting.
  - zer00eyz 2y ago
    > "Explicit material is available in a variety of forums - from popular music to television to the Internet." Tipper Gore The more things change the more they stay the same. > A 5-7 year old kid having access to certain thing is just awful parenting. Sure is, but what do you want a system where we have to license people before the can have kids? Because there have been quite a few dumb, irresponsible parents that have birth brilliance.
    - partiallypro 2y ago
      > The more things change the more they stay the same. Comparing this to Tipper Gore is so ridiculous. It's as to write off potential concerns because she was against video games and rap music, then applying that logic to an algorithm that is specifically designed to draw you in and make you consume. Forums and Newsgroups were also much harder to find. Google didn't even exist at that point (or at the very least wasn't popularized); it took minutes to get a single "explicit" image to load. Not only that, but the idea of a "filter bubble" didn't exist, because generally speaking information was harder to find, but also more diverse once you found it. That isn't true once you're sucked into an algorithm. I said in another post, I think you could let a kid explore around the age of 13 on these platforms. It's still probably not healthy, but 5 years old? That's insanity, and for the numbers to be near 30% is outrageous. >but what do you want a system where we have to license people before the can have kids? Weird jump in logic here. I was never suggesting this. You can be concerned about something and not want such drastic measures. That is usually how adults operate. Teenager logic deals in absolutes like this.

by dmm 2y ago

dj_mc_merlin 2y ago

Your examples are decades old. People have been worrying about technology spoiling their children since we've had writing. Are you arguing you were ruined by TVs and computers growing up? Or satanic music?

cheeseomlit 2y ago
Are you arguing that TVs and computers are not capable of ruining lives? There are a legion of washed up WoW addicts that would indicate they can, to name one example
atonse 2y ago
The difference is that those other technologies weren't fine tuned to individuals to literally short-circuit their brains to get the most perfect amount of dopamine at the right time to keep them addicted. People aren't getting addicted as a side-effect. Addiction is the primary-effect of the way the companies have designed these experiences, and addition (or the more harmless term "customer engagement") is a direct measure of success at these companies. So the analogy breaks down pretty quickly. They're more like Slot machines, which are highly regulated and age-gated.
rightbyte 2y ago
Instagram's Tik Tok rip off, Youtube's Tik Tok rip off, the original to some extent etc are way worse than whatever we grew up with. At least I believe so. It is just a gut feeling though. Like, it is poison due to the manipulative algorithmic feeds, or something. Like how Facebook turned into a genocide enabler in 2013 something when they added their crappy non chronological feed. The format in it self is probably OK, as in, short amusing videos.

zer00eyz 2y ago

Parents have been complaining about books, tv, radio... If your an American of a certain age Tipper gore was complaining about music corrupting children.... Moving the goal posts all the time is a terrible means to form an argument.

partiallypro 2y ago
When your kid is reading a book, watching TV, radio, playing a video game, etc you still have a -general- idea of what the kid is into. When it comes to something like TikTok, YouTube, etc they are one swipe away from literally anything. I don't think a kid 5-7 years of age can truly grasp it. I've been very online for a long time, but I don't think that really started until I was 15 or so. A 5-7 year old kid having access to certain thing is just awful parenting.
- zer00eyz 2y ago
  > "Explicit material is available in a variety of forums - from popular music to television to the Internet." Tipper Gore The more things change the more they stay the same. > A 5-7 year old kid having access to certain thing is just awful parenting. Sure is, but what do you want a system where we have to license people before the can have kids? Because there have been quite a few dumb, irresponsible parents that have birth brilliance.
  - partiallypro 2y ago
    > The more things change the more they stay the same. Comparing this to Tipper Gore is so ridiculous. It's as to write off potential concerns because she was against video games and rap music, then applying that logic to an algorithm that is specifically designed to draw you in and make you consume. Forums and Newsgroups were also much harder to find. Google didn't even exist at that point (or at the very least wasn't popularized); it took minutes to get a single "explicit" image to load. Not only that, but the idea of a "filter bubble" didn't exist, because generally speaking information was harder to find, but also more diverse once you found it. That isn't true once you're sucked into an algorithm. I said in another post, I think you could let a kid explore around the age of 13 on these platforms. It's still probably not healthy, but 5 years old? That's insanity, and for the numbers to be near 30% is outrageous. >but what do you want a system where we have to license people before the can have kids? Weird jump in logic here. I was never suggesting this. You can be concerned about something and not want such drastic measures. That is usually how adults operate. Teenager logic deals in absolutes like this.