▲ 183 ▼ Systemd’s New Feature Brings Age Verification Option to Linux (itsfoss.com) submitted 4 months ago by other_cat@piefed.zip to c/linux@programming.dev 95 comments fedilink hide all child comments The optional birthDate field gives other projects a standardized data source for age verification compliance.
[–] lost_faith@lemmy.ca 26 points 4 months ago (1 child) The boiling pot goes up 1C, then another 1C permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (2 children) https://www.britannica.com/topic/slippery-slope-argument permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 10 points 4 months ago (1 child) nope. slippery slope is basically “bad thing can happen, so it will happen” without evidence to support that outcome. here, we have a trajectory. there’s a pattern. it has momentum at this point. it hasn’t changed corse. it’s followed a predictable and proven pattern. It’s done so because the the pressures exerted on this particular system guide the outcome in predictable ways. that is entirely different than the slippery slope dismissal permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago No, entirely incorrect. "bad thing can happen, so it will happen" is essentially a mangling of Murphy's Law. In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected [eg: this minor law] because the slippery slope advocate believes it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends [eg: loose claims of a pot getting hotter implying further details will be demanded next]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pinguini@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago More "thin end of the wedge". permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (2 children) https://www.britannica.com/topic/slippery-slope-argument permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 10 points 4 months ago (1 child) nope. slippery slope is basically “bad thing can happen, so it will happen” without evidence to support that outcome. here, we have a trajectory. there’s a pattern. it has momentum at this point. it hasn’t changed corse. it’s followed a predictable and proven pattern. It’s done so because the the pressures exerted on this particular system guide the outcome in predictable ways. that is entirely different than the slippery slope dismissal permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago No, entirely incorrect. "bad thing can happen, so it will happen" is essentially a mangling of Murphy's Law. In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected [eg: this minor law] because the slippery slope advocate believes it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends [eg: loose claims of a pot getting hotter implying further details will be demanded next]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pinguini@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago More "thin end of the wedge". permalink fedilink source parent
[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 10 points 4 months ago (1 child) nope. slippery slope is basically “bad thing can happen, so it will happen” without evidence to support that outcome. here, we have a trajectory. there’s a pattern. it has momentum at this point. it hasn’t changed corse. it’s followed a predictable and proven pattern. It’s done so because the the pressures exerted on this particular system guide the outcome in predictable ways. that is entirely different than the slippery slope dismissal permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago No, entirely incorrect. "bad thing can happen, so it will happen" is essentially a mangling of Murphy's Law. In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected [eg: this minor law] because the slippery slope advocate believes it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends [eg: loose claims of a pot getting hotter implying further details will be demanded next]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago No, entirely incorrect. "bad thing can happen, so it will happen" is essentially a mangling of Murphy's Law. In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected [eg: this minor law] because the slippery slope advocate believes it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends [eg: loose claims of a pot getting hotter implying further details will be demanded next]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Pinguini@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago More "thin end of the wedge". permalink fedilink source parent