- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
why is it always the worst laws proposed under the guise of protecting children
Because you can’t argue that. Any other ground reason for policy can be challenged or counterargued or relies on values which are arguable.
No one is going to plainly argue “ok but how about we do not protect children?”. And if someone tries a different angle such as “this law is not really going to protect anyone and will bring a lot of problems for children and adults alike” it will be easily dismissed as “you insidious snake, why do you want to hurt children?! Don’t sabotage child protection!”. Which autokills conversation.
Somehow it never crossed their minds to stop selling firearms to teens, but vendor Internet in the name of protecting kids? Sign us up. Fuck that.
Pretty much any bill, worldwide, that includes the phrase “project kids” is always about pushing censorship, government surveillance and other forms of oppression on everyone. And guess what: zero actual benefit to kids.
Why take a principled stand against those who are pushing this when you can just say “government” and leave everyone thinking this is a bipartisan problem?
Because it is a bipartisan problem.
Knowing Biden he’s all in on this, he signed off on the Patriot Act too so f*** him
neoliberals are just as bad as Republicans
deleted by creator
“The United States is also a one-party state, but with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.” - Julius Nyerere
deleted by creator
Not even close, but try again. They just look the same when you’re so far left you need to squint to see anyone to the right of you. There is a massive gap between “neoliberals” as you call them, and the modern conservative electorate. Those “neoliberals” also represent the majority of voters on the left, hence the guy who is president being one of them. Stay mad though.
deleted by creator
Nah they made perfect sense and you responded with “nuh uh”
Stay mad, lib
every time they say it’s to “protect the children” or “protect freedom” it is invariably neither.
deleted by creator
Not the US government, republicans and one random house dem that seems to hate technology.
Not the US government, republicans and one random house dem that seems to hate technology.
Whose the Dem?
Blumenthal, of course.
What about the other 20?
Why do say of course?
He’s always the one giving a ‘bipartisan’ veneer to these awful bills. Here’s one trying to end encryption, which he co-sponsored with Lindsey Graham
WTF then he isn’t a Democrat if he co authoring bills with Graham.
The bill has 21 Democrats as cosponsors (22 Republicans). Source: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/1409/cosponsors
oMg boTh sIdeS aRe nOt tHe sAmE… except for when it comes to eroding freedoms
This is quite scary. I don’t know if it being on the calendar means they’re guaranteed to vote on it but the text of the bill would completely fuck the Fediverse. You literally need paid personnel to comply with these regulations.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3663/all-actions?overview=closed#tabs
I guess we’ll just become criminals and host our servers in countries that actually respect freedom.
Host somewhere else. They’re not the world police.
deleted by creator
Isn’t this also the bill that could screw up encryption too?
deleted by creator
Except when it’s guns
Exactly right.
And then they lower the age that kids can get married to 14/15 (pedos!), and change labor laws so pre-teens can work in dangerous jobs or serve alcohol.
If they want to protect “children”, we need Xtra restrictive gun laws, and child abuse laws. Who protects children from abuse at home?
Not conservatives, they are the ones behind all this.deleted by creator
What else is new?
Maybe the Internet was a mistake ?
Maybe leaving the trees was a mistake.
Culturally we’re going back to the Middle Ages…
Specifically the Dark Ages.
removed by mod
