This is you saying you want this.

yes. does that say “we need age verification”? it says we need to acknowledge legitimate issues if we’re to have any hope at consensus.

age verification is not the answer, it’s just the only one being proffered… you want to make this go away? find a better answer to the problem and espouse that.

here’s a small one: no use of internet connected laptops for school work since that is widespread and directly undermines a parent’s ability to keep tabs on their kids.

the answer is not “you’re just a prude afraid of boobs, loser.” that’s how you drive people to the right wing, because at least those guys are saying “the internet is dangerous for kids.” and that’s how you end up in the funnel.

eta: sorry about the insult if you saw it. it had no place here

is it a dark secret if everyone knows?

you need to re-read everything i wrote because you clearly did not understand it when i twice said that i don’t want id verification. you’re not arguing with me, you’re arguing with someone else in your head

i’m already keeping them off the wider internet. that’s not the point. the point is that even if i do that, society as a whole makes it very, very difficult.

i’m not saying anyone should give a website id. one of the major things i repeat is: “never give a website a face or an id”

but the idea that it’s just reactionary “omg my kids can’t see boobs” is flat out wrong. the internet is a dangerous place for everyone, but especially children. pretending it’s not is hiding your head in the sand. at the same time as it is incredibly dangerous, basically all the forces of modern society are trying to force our children on to it.

this is a battle i fight daily, and have been fighting for many years, and i’m tired of people trying to pretend it’s simple when it is anything but.

you are not going to win over people rightly concerned about their kids by telling them it’s actually simple when it isn’t. you’re going to drive them away.

you want to tackle this, you have to acknowledge reality, and that reality is that on the internet, your children are prey.

these are the same people who beat their kids. when the kids eventually cut contact the parents are shocked and can’t understand how this happened and think maybe if they beat them more it would have stopped this

tbh, i’m more scared of the pedos that haunt roblox and every other platform for children rather them seeing boobs.

i don’t like age verification either, but that means my kids aren’t allowed to use the internet except in a very restricted fashion. meanwhile every single one of their peers is left to run wild, so they’re socially isolated as a result

don’t pretend internet anonymity is an unalloyed good. fuck, just look at the bot farms for a less rapey problem of enormous magnitude.

there’s more than one company doing this, they’re doing more than just this, and they’re all basically in cahoots

eta: the original reply was meant more generally, though i admit i made that clear as mud. however, it should be read as a general statement, and not just about ai companies but the new era of grift hyperreality that we live in.

riches for whom? the powerful feel like they’re being unfairly constrained. that we’ve gotten too big for our britches, too arrogant. what’s the point of societal wealth if you can’t make someone give you their child to rape?

societal wealth help society mostly and removes authority and power from private wealth. that’s the calculus and these people are moloch

did the stock price go up? it’s not stupid. is everyone talking about this impossible scenario? it’s not stupid.

fundamentally, these people are marketers and need to be understood that way. you can’t evaluate their words or actions as if they are what they say the are, and treating them as if they are anything but subterfuge is giving them legitimacy which they not only don’t deserve, but will be immediately leveraged into more of this shit.

this is just the advertiser’s version of “the big lie”

how do you feel about ancient rome?

me just waiting for violet to come badk

the chaos is the point.

who benefits most from chaos? the rich and powerful. you don’t sell your daughter into slavery unless things are real, real bad. so things have to get real, real bad.

don’t fight the last war

canada really isn’t that different.

it’s not a distraction. it’s a show of force. things are ramping up.

found the pedo

ah, i see. i think i’d say “divisive” or “politically divisive” in that case, but i understand where you’re coming from

i am honestly curious what you mean by “political” here.

from my perspective, it’s a celebration of america declaring independence 250 years ago and the continuance of it as a state in that tradition. i can’t imagine anything more inherently political no matter who or what force is behind it. like, it’s tautological. so what do you mean by it?

we should have learned our lesson after they did and done our damndest to create protocols immune to capture. there were excuses in 1989, there aren’t now

Regardless, the potential for a company to dominate the implementation of a specification is not a reason not to create said specification

yes it is