3 ms·

You argue against "individualist societies" but then blame "their parents" for not coping with the kinda impossible task of protecting their kids from big tech

You argue against "individualist societies" but then blame "their parents" for not coping with the kinda impossible task of protecting their kids from big tech or the surveillance state. It is a collective problem with collective solutions.

malfist 5mo ago
So your solution to preventing "surveillance state" is to unmask everyone on the internet? Now who has the inconsistent argument
- i80and 5mo ago
  I don't know the parent's policy position, but it seems like they didn't express one, and you've just assumed they support deanonymization?
  - rightbyte 5mo ago
    Ye this modern view that more and more assumes polarisation of stands on matters is kinda annoying. I don't support deanonymization.
    - Forgeties79 5mo ago
      It’s become bog standard to just throw up extremely binary strawmen these days or otherwise bait people into arguments demanding sources that you can then point at and whine about. Zero attempt to understand or ask questions that clarify. Anything that avoids having to listen or express your own opinion in a substantive way.
- Forgeties79 5mo ago
  where did they say anything like that?
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
pretzel5297 5mo ago
I did not say anything about protecting kids from big tech or the state? Even if I had, your argument is we must surveil more to protect the kids from the surveillance state?
- rightbyte 5mo ago
  I interpreted you as it was the parents responsibility to protect their children, ye. I don't argue for a surveillance state. Authoritarians push authoritarian policies with convinient excuses. I do understand that. I think there need to be a cultural shift and that involves the collective of parents not indivual families. Like, my TV installed adtech shovelware over night and my son woke up early and watched it. Sport teams organize on Facebook. The school headmaster wants CCTVs. Door bell cameras are getting more and more common. We can't fight those things as individuals.

malfist 5mo ago

So your solution to preventing "surveillance state" is to unmask everyone on the internet? Now who has the inconsistent argument

i80and 5mo ago
I don't know the parent's policy position, but it seems like they didn't express one, and you've just assumed they support deanonymization?
- rightbyte 5mo ago
  Ye this modern view that more and more assumes polarisation of stands on matters is kinda annoying. I don't support deanonymization.
  - Forgeties79 5mo ago
    It’s become bog standard to just throw up extremely binary strawmen these days or otherwise bait people into arguments demanding sources that you can then point at and whine about. Zero attempt to understand or ask questions that clarify. Anything that avoids having to listen or express your own opinion in a substantive way.
Forgeties79 5mo ago
where did they say anything like that?

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]

pretzel5297 5mo ago

I did not say anything about protecting kids from big tech or the state? Even if I had, your argument is we must surveil more to protect the kids from the surveillance state?

rightbyte 5mo ago
I interpreted you as it was the parents responsibility to protect their children, ye. I don't argue for a surveillance state. Authoritarians push authoritarian policies with convinient excuses. I do understand that. I think there need to be a cultural shift and that involves the collective of parents not indivual families. Like, my TV installed adtech shovelware over night and my son woke up early and watched it. Sport teams organize on Facebook. The school headmaster wants CCTVs. Door bell cameras are getting more and more common. We can't fight those things as individuals.