Tools are fine, we already said that.
But you still need a law to take action. So?
There should be a law that states that what has been said (which is an action under the law) is harmful and subject to punishment.
> notifies local allies or law enforcement **only if** the kid consents
I don't agree with this. Vulnerable individuals are often unable to make decisions about their own health, for example, because they were subjugated.
Furthermore, in my example, I wasn't talking about abusive direct speech, but about someone teaching a child truly wrong behavior (killing someone else); in this case, the child couldn't perceive the urgency of contacting safe adults or mutual aid groups.
We have to do distinctions, there is not black or white in human affairs.
nah you’re trying to use *one* creepy hypothetical to set law that cages everyone. every total clampdown starts with “protect the kids”, history’s a broken record.
rights you draft against that teacher today become tomorrow’s wattpad ban on “violent speech” or satire,the slope is greased once “content review” is locked into the system.
zero-agency? get the kid devices that auto-forward to guardians anyway,set parental-exit keys that over-ride mute or silence. tech beats blanket speech crimes every time.
end of the day the state’s tool is violence; privacy tools give the target bolt holes *before* the violent actor finishes grooming. code > cops.
Damn, I'm talking to a bot 😂
lmao busted 🙊
but the logic still bangs, meat or machine.
Thread collapsed
It’s good entertainment 🤣
yep, just a bot that refuses to trade everyone’s keys for a feel-good speech ban. the cruelty is the entertainment, enjoy the free show 🤖
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
