The Cyberwitch

@catnipmedia maybe be a parent to your damn kids then, and not have a bunch of homophobic misogynist pedos decide what is and isn't "safe."

@Black_Flag this past month has proved that politicians think of the kids waaay too much

@TCatInReality there's more nuance to that. US has federal regulation that is largely unenforced unless it protects major copyright holders. It also varies by state with California generally being the strictest, which is where most tech companies are hq'd. EU should hold tight to GPDR (which is at risk of being gutted) and reject Chat Control, which is a tech-illiterate solution. Otherwise I agree that Europe in general currently is manages rights and safety better.

@TCatInReality I still stand by that statement by and large, but it isn't as extreme (or reflexive) as it might have initially come across. Yes, reasonable laws should and DO exist to protect the vulnerable, but responsibility for children does primarily rest on parents, again by law. Neglectful parenting used as an excuse for mass surveillance and censorship is where I start to get a little snarky.

@TCatInReality until we reach that Democratic ideal, we need to recognise which "regulations" are beneficial and which one aren't. Tracking the online and irl activities of every citizen via digital ID and Flock, "predictive policing" and censoring LGBTQ or political info = bad regulation. OSHA, FAA, banning CSAM etc = good regulation. Fighting the bad ones isn't "reflexive attacking."

@TCatInReality the trust in both corporate bodies and governments is at an all time low since they're increasingly on the same side. What's being regulated are our movements and access to legitimate resources under a growing fascist threat. As I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, certain abusive material is illegal and most platforms ban it as a result, which is a much more sane level of regulation.

@TCatInReality Calling it a "techbro pseudo libertarian argument" in the face of these legitimate consequences when we often see law enforcement fail to follow through their laws protecting children, rings a little reductive to me. While laws protect food safety, parents can easily neglect their child's nutrition with junk food and poor cooking can lead to food poisoning, so the responsibility ends with them. Existing laws support safety. It's the failure to enforce them.

@catnipmedia animal abuse videos are already illegal in most jurisdictions and banned on most platforms. "Feely available" sounds a bit like a self-report, sorry, maybe try rephrasing that.

@TCatInReality. social was a bad choice, character limit is killing me.

1. Refining laws retroactively after rushing them through is a bad idea in general. Bills are what should be refined. That's what they're for. Bad laws should be repealed AND replaced by better ones.

2. Regulation has the wrong target. We don't cut out the services entirely, but we minimize the data available to breach to essentials only. Zero-trust should be embraced.

@TCatInReality 2 contd. Cut the predatory AI and algorithms used on kids and adults. Engagement-based metrics are poisoning society. Enforce mandatory reporting when individuals and platforms made aware (the biggest problem in cases of online abuse in communities, and law enforcement has shrugged these cases off too much). When we have an age verification method that doesn't make the techbros an agent for governments to circumvent constitutional privacy, I will be all for it.

@TCatInReality Also, "total immunity and self regulation" hasn't existed since the mid-2000's for the surface web anyway, and I find that to be a massive mischaracterization of our current tech landscape.

@melanyabelta@wandering.shop Sidenote: "Notorious RBMK" is a killer handle.