4 ms·

>For the same reason your taxes pay for schools even when you don't have kids. But I have benefited from public education. Me paying for someone else's educati

>For the same reason your taxes pay for schools even when you don't have kids. But I have benefited from public education. Me paying for someone else's education in return is fair. >Because we live in a society. "Because we live in a society" is a phrase flexible enough that it can be used to justify anything, including outright theft: "we live in a society; us taking your stuff is the price you have been chosen to pay for your continued belonging". Want to try a little harder?

CPLX 4mo ago
You have convinced me that there are in fact no differences between things, and that protecting children from adult content is indistinguishable from stealing from people, and therefore I was foolish to advocate for it. I stand humbly corrected.
- fluoridation 4mo ago
  I'm glad you've seen the error of your ways.
intended 4mo ago
Good God. After reading this thread - You are forced to pay to attest your age, because as a society we have decided not to, or are unable to, end social media firms and porn sites. At the same time, we have decided that the harms that occur to kids and teens need to be mitigated.
- fluoridation 4mo ago
  No. My question was not why am I forced to pay, my question was why should I pay. Obviously if I have to pay, I will (that's a logical necessity, because if I could avoid it then it was untrue that I had to, to begin with). Why should I pay? That is to say, by what mechanism am I saddled with the moral responsibility that justifies me having to spend my money to protect someone else's children? Given your line of argumentation, I'm going to guess that you don't have an answer to this question; your answer is that I should GFMS and just pay. Prove me wrong.
  - intended 4mo ago
    This is orbiting the issue of personal responsibility and social burdens. I get the impression that you recognize that there are certain costs that are distributed on members of a society, because it is the least problematic way to address some collective action issue. You could migrate to the libertarian ideal, if that is what suits you. if this counts as GFMS, I sadly don’t mean in it those terms. I dont know you well enough to know what specific harms would matter to your wellbeing. It could range from what the state of the next voting cohort will be. It could range from having a social environment of better adjusted adults creating art, science or just relationships that will impact you as you age. It’s more capacity for families, mental resilience and less dead weight loss of kids getting trapped into emotional tar pits. It’s a signal that as a society we don’t want to see our kids addicted, and that if we impose such costs on ourselves, we will impose heavier costs on the perpetrators. There is a reckoning with social media and addictive design that is to be had; this is a step on that path. It makes it easier for parents who are struggling, and reduces harm to kids and teens. It may give us a way to deal with the absolute scourge of non consensual intimate imagery. I’ve personally had to flag and remove stuff of that nature, and even in a country like america, that kind of content is life ending. In a religiously conservative country, that can lead to much, much worse. However this is a smorgasbord of ills that society as a whole is struggling to deal with. You are a standing member of that society. I don’t know you well enough to make a case that makes sense. I will add, You also don’t look to be a passive member of society, so you are doubly screwed. You get the bonus burden of having to think about how to solve the problem in the best manner possible.
    - fluoridation 4mo ago
      >It could range from [...] as a whole is struggling to deal with. I thought you said you read the thread. You've fallen into the same mistake CPLX has made. You're answering why children should be protected. I've already granted that premise, there's no need to argue for it. My question was why people who don't have children should bear the burden of that protection instead of their parents. If a more concrete question would help, why should all adults pay to be able to prove that they're adults (just to be able to retain a freedom they already had, I should add), instead of being given that ability for free by the government, and the government collecting the costs of the program from parents?

CPLX 4mo ago

You have convinced me that there are in fact no differences between things, and that protecting children from adult content is indistinguishable from stealing from people, and therefore I was foolish to advocate for it. I stand humbly corrected.

fluoridation 4mo ago
I'm glad you've seen the error of your ways.

intended 4mo ago

Good God. After reading this thread - You are forced to pay to attest your age, because as a society we have decided not to, or are unable to, end social media firms and porn sites. At the same time, we have decided that the harms that occur to kids and teens need to be mitigated.

fluoridation 4mo ago
No. My question was not why am I forced to pay, my question was why should I pay. Obviously if I have to pay, I will (that's a logical necessity, because if I could avoid it then it was untrue that I had to, to begin with). Why should I pay? That is to say, by what mechanism am I saddled with the moral responsibility that justifies me having to spend my money to protect someone else's children? Given your line of argumentation, I'm going to guess that you don't have an answer to this question; your answer is that I should GFMS and just pay. Prove me wrong.
- intended 4mo ago
  This is orbiting the issue of personal responsibility and social burdens. I get the impression that you recognize that there are certain costs that are distributed on members of a society, because it is the least problematic way to address some collective action issue. You could migrate to the libertarian ideal, if that is what suits you. if this counts as GFMS, I sadly don’t mean in it those terms. I dont know you well enough to know what specific harms would matter to your wellbeing. It could range from what the state of the next voting cohort will be. It could range from having a social environment of better adjusted adults creating art, science or just relationships that will impact you as you age. It’s more capacity for families, mental resilience and less dead weight loss of kids getting trapped into emotional tar pits. It’s a signal that as a society we don’t want to see our kids addicted, and that if we impose such costs on ourselves, we will impose heavier costs on the perpetrators. There is a reckoning with social media and addictive design that is to be had; this is a step on that path. It makes it easier for parents who are struggling, and reduces harm to kids and teens. It may give us a way to deal with the absolute scourge of non consensual intimate imagery. I’ve personally had to flag and remove stuff of that nature, and even in a country like america, that kind of content is life ending. In a religiously conservative country, that can lead to much, much worse. However this is a smorgasbord of ills that society as a whole is struggling to deal with. You are a standing member of that society. I don’t know you well enough to make a case that makes sense. I will add, You also don’t look to be a passive member of society, so you are doubly screwed. You get the bonus burden of having to think about how to solve the problem in the best manner possible.
  - fluoridation 4mo ago
    >It could range from [...] as a whole is struggling to deal with. I thought you said you read the thread. You've fallen into the same mistake CPLX has made. You're answering why children should be protected. I've already granted that premise, there's no need to argue for it. My question was why people who don't have children should bear the burden of that protection instead of their parents. If a more concrete question would help, why should all adults pay to be able to prove that they're adults (just to be able to retain a freedom they already had, I should add), instead of being given that ability for free by the government, and the government collecting the costs of the program from parents?