top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 165 points 3 years ago
[–] 58 points 3 years ago (2 children)

Not the US government, republicans and one random house dem that seems to hate technology.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Not the US government, republicans and one random house dem that seems to hate technology.

    Whose the Dem?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)
  • [+] 50 points 3 years ago (4 children)
  • [–] 19 points 3 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 44 points 3 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • [–] 36 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    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

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Why old men are so obsessed with kids? Are they pedo or something?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 3 years ago

    It's never about kids. If they gave half a fuck about kids, we'd have free school lunches and teachers would be paid a fair salary.

    So long as the internet is around to distribute fact-checks and officer-involved homicide videos they have no plausible lies by which the 80% of us in poverty or precarity should tolerate the abuse of plutocrats and capitalists.

    So this is a first amendment issue: it's about suppression of political speech. It always was 🌍 👩‍🚀 🔫 👨‍🚀 🌑

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago

    They're a convenient scapegoat. You can accuse the other side of not caring about/endangering children for political points, and children don't have politically-relevant opinions, or votes, so you're never going to have children speaking up and going "that's not correct", or protesting against you for a law you've passed. If they do end up protesting, you can point fingers at the parents and say that they're indoctrinating the children.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    every time they say it's to "protect the children" or "protect freedom" it is invariably neither.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • Perhaps politicians should concentrate on making it so there's less depressing stuff in the world for anyone to see and hear, and not creating more of it with things like this rubbish bill. 🤷‍♀️

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 3 years ago

    Fine, so who will be judging if there's a depressive content on the internet, a psychologist? Also how about non-US sites, will they be banned or something?

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Culturally we're going back to the Middle Ages...

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 3 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 20 points 3 years ago

    Isn't this also the bill that could screw up encryption too?

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 3 years ago

    woah no way

    in other news, every sixty seconds in Africa, a minute passes.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 3 years ago

    it has nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with destroying privacy

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    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

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Neoliberals are conservatives. They go on the same smoldering pile.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [+] 9 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
    [–] 9 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    why is it always the worst laws proposed under the guise of protecting children

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Isn't it something that China has been doing for a while? In their version, it's called 'spreading positive energy'.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    It's almost like everything the US said about China was just a projection of their own insecurities.

    It might get to a point where China actually is relatively more liberating than "stable democracies" in internet access.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago

    What else is new?

  • source
  • [+] 4 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)
    [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    This headline could have been written 20 years ago.

  • source
  • This doesn't seem different from what many if not most major platforms are already doing voluntarily. Just replace the word "depressing" with the word "toxic" and suddenly everyone will support this.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Protect kids from guns would be better.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›