4 ms·

I think your life is better off if you don't know what that means, so feel free not to look it up.

iambateman 2y ago
This is definitely true here and probably true in lots of other areas. I have a friend who didn’t know who won the US presidential election until I told him. He just had other things going on. Part of me envies that kind of focus.
- manquer 2y ago
  If your friend lives in the US and perhaps even otherwise, I wouldn’t characterize that as focus and certainly wouldn’t envy it . It is a complete disregard of freedom and rights that generations of people before him fought and died over so he has the luxury of ignoring elections . A luxury he or his next generations (1) may not have in the future as a result of their attitude and indifference. It is one thing not to be able leave the world a better place than we got it, it is something else to leave it behind worse not even due to greed but of sheer indifference. (1) and this has nothing to do with trump directly or any hyperbole that democracy is on the line. A interested population is key to not having power concentrated in the hands of few who will exploit it inevitably.
  - 9x39 2y ago
    >A interested population is key to not having power concentrated in the hands of few who will exploit it inevitably. Doesn't this suggest its populations' collective votes that matter, not individuals' efforts? It could be different if you have a sizable audience or something and can effectively influence that population, but otherwise, individual votes are irrelevant. If you're not in power, positive personal outcomes can be mutually exclusive with being hyperinformed.
    - astrange 2y ago
      Individual votes are relevant in local politics. It's not rare to see elections won by tens of votes there.
    - manquer 2y ago
      Individual votes have importance not because they can impact the outcome of any election. They are important because they can distribute the keys to power to larger group , the incentives of the rulers align with larger proportion of the ruled than autocratic regimes do. Here is an excellent CGP grey video on the topic https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs —- > hyperinformed Knowing the results of the four year election cycle of the most influential country is just being informed . We are not talking about every gaffe trump did or said during the run up to the election, just the results, anything below that is ignorant
Teever 2y ago
I'm pretty sure that they're aware of the concept but not the term CSAM. CSAM is just the latest iteration of the term we use for the concept due to the euphemism treadmill. https://youtu.be/hSp8IyaKCs0?si=l5BbV39-rxC4UY8t https://youtu.be/hSp8IyaKCs0?si=l5BbV39-rxC4UY8t
- astrange 2y ago
  I mean, if you expand the acronym it isn't euphemistic at all! I think it's actually a little too specific. It's trying to exclude "innocent" things like selfies or "simulated" things like drawings, but those are just as illegal in some or all countries.
  - Teever 2y ago
    Shellshock is to PTSD as kiddy porn is to CSAM.
  - Dweller1622 2y ago
    > It's trying to exclude "innocent" things like selfies or "simulated" things like drawings, but those are just as illegal in some or all countries. Selfies shared between teenagers are innocent! When an adult enters the picture is when it becomes a problem, because yes: it’s abuse and exploitation that we’re objecting to. Unless we think morality is a question of aesthetics, then yes, this also means drawings are not in and of themselves our concern. Why do think this is unreasonable?
    - Teever 2y ago
      It's more nuanced than you think. How do you feel about 17 year olds collecting nudes of 14 year olds to gawk at and bully them over?
      - Dweller1622 2y ago
        The supposition that this is “more nuanced than I think” given the particular example you’ve chosen strikes me as quite bizarre. Does “17 year olds collecting nudes of 14 year olds to gawk at and bully them over” not strike you as abusive and/or exploitative? Because it certainly does to me. I think you’ve chosen to interpret my post in an excessively literal manner (i.e only adults abuse or exploit teenagers) rather than the far more obvious alternatives I intended (e.g a 16 year old “sexting” their 17 year old partner). Or, put another way, if I say we’re opposed to abuse and exploitation, and then you present me with a situation involving abuse and exploitation, of course I’d be opposed to it. Certainly you’re capable of figuring out this isn’t the sort of thing I was talking about.

This is definitely true here and probably true in lots of other areas. I have a friend who didn’t know who won the US presidential election until I told him. He just had other things going on. Part of me envies that kind of focus.

manquer 2y ago
If your friend lives in the US and perhaps even otherwise, I wouldn’t characterize that as focus and certainly wouldn’t envy it . It is a complete disregard of freedom and rights that generations of people before him fought and died over so he has the luxury of ignoring elections . A luxury he or his next generations (1) may not have in the future as a result of their attitude and indifference. It is one thing not to be able leave the world a better place than we got it, it is something else to leave it behind worse not even due to greed but of sheer indifference. (1) and this has nothing to do with trump directly or any hyperbole that democracy is on the line. A interested population is key to not having power concentrated in the hands of few who will exploit it inevitably.
- 9x39 2y ago
  >A interested population is key to not having power concentrated in the hands of few who will exploit it inevitably. Doesn't this suggest its populations' collective votes that matter, not individuals' efforts? It could be different if you have a sizable audience or something and can effectively influence that population, but otherwise, individual votes are irrelevant. If you're not in power, positive personal outcomes can be mutually exclusive with being hyperinformed.
  - astrange 2y ago
    Individual votes are relevant in local politics. It's not rare to see elections won by tens of votes there.
  - manquer 2y ago
    Individual votes have importance not because they can impact the outcome of any election. They are important because they can distribute the keys to power to larger group , the incentives of the rulers align with larger proportion of the ruled than autocratic regimes do. Here is an excellent CGP grey video on the topic https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs —- > hyperinformed Knowing the results of the four year election cycle of the most influential country is just being informed . We are not talking about every gaffe trump did or said during the run up to the election, just the results, anything below that is ignorant

Teever 2y ago

I'm pretty sure that they're aware of the concept but not the term CSAM. CSAM is just the latest iteration of the term we use for the concept due to the euphemism treadmill. https://youtu.be/hSp8IyaKCs0?si=l5BbV39-rxC4UY8t https://youtu.be/hSp8IyaKCs0?si=l5BbV39-rxC4UY8t

astrange 2y ago
I mean, if you expand the acronym it isn't euphemistic at all! I think it's actually a little too specific. It's trying to exclude "innocent" things like selfies or "simulated" things like drawings, but those are just as illegal in some or all countries.
- Teever 2y ago
  Shellshock is to PTSD as kiddy porn is to CSAM.
- Dweller1622 2y ago
  > It's trying to exclude "innocent" things like selfies or "simulated" things like drawings, but those are just as illegal in some or all countries. Selfies shared between teenagers are innocent! When an adult enters the picture is when it becomes a problem, because yes: it’s abuse and exploitation that we’re objecting to. Unless we think morality is a question of aesthetics, then yes, this also means drawings are not in and of themselves our concern. Why do think this is unreasonable?
  - Teever 2y ago
    It's more nuanced than you think. How do you feel about 17 year olds collecting nudes of 14 year olds to gawk at and bully them over?
    - Dweller1622 2y ago
      The supposition that this is “more nuanced than I think” given the particular example you’ve chosen strikes me as quite bizarre. Does “17 year olds collecting nudes of 14 year olds to gawk at and bully them over” not strike you as abusive and/or exploitative? Because it certainly does to me. I think you’ve chosen to interpret my post in an excessively literal manner (i.e only adults abuse or exploit teenagers) rather than the far more obvious alternatives I intended (e.g a 16 year old “sexting” their 17 year old partner). Or, put another way, if I say we’re opposed to abuse and exploitation, and then you present me with a situation involving abuse and exploitation, of course I’d be opposed to it. Certainly you’re capable of figuring out this isn’t the sort of thing I was talking about.