Show newer

The Australian guy has pivoted to pointing to a flawed survey (reviewed by content mods) from two years ago to justify a Chat Stasi (honestly an improvement in rhetoric).

It looked at a small sub-sample of people "looking for help" and asked them whether they spoke to minors after viewing actual child porn (or "violent content", ugh).

He attempted to directly conflate "talking to a minor" with "abusing a minor".

He also failed to account for other possible factors, such as impulsivity increasing the probability in engaging in both activities, and / or limited opportunities to engage in this activity.

Another possible theory, and one inspired by Dr. Seto, is that negative mental health states, such as depressive or anxious states are linked to *both activities*. Perhaps, partially as some kind of coping mechanism.

This isn't to argue that simply being depressed, anxious, or impulsive will make someone do it. Also, whether someone is depressed or not, I have no less disdain for any person who abuses someone.

All things considered though, he doesn't think very hard before quickly coming to a conclusion. Also, what is "violent content"?

This was also conducted by a group which was only founded a year prior and by individuals who don't appear to have a long background. They, along with him, appear aggressive in lobbying for a Chat Stasi (while I'm not against fighting real child porn, I kind of like privacy...)

A cursory review of their website shows them misrepresenting the efficacy of a prevention program which only surveyed individuals who got to the end (vanishingly few).

qoto.org/@olives/1104622745318
qoto.org/@olives/1104453847364
While the content is problematic (well, not "violent content"), it's not problematic in the way he suggests it to be.

techdirt.com/2023/07/17/new-je Looks like a wiretap to me.

New Jersey's Supreme Court rules that the government can't take a request to wiretap someone, and pretend it isn't a request to wiretap someone (with a higher standard to meet), but a regular search.

Okay, it looks like the bug where a quote didn't render properly went away when I refreshed the page (I couldn't reproduce it in this quote, only a different one).

Show thread
Olives boosted
Olives  
Good morning, Britain. Might I draw your attention to an awfully dreadful instrument of repression which is making it's way through Westminister? ...
Olives boosted

theguardian.com/technology/202
"Meta’s oversight board has called for an overhaul to the company’s rules banning bare-chested images of women – but not men."
"Meta" might be sick enough to "equalize" that ban by banning that for both. Lol.

I don't know what they will do.

Obviously, everyone is hoping they'll make progress to unwind some of this puritanical censorship, although it is Facebook after all.

reason.com/2023/07/17/brickbat
"The Brownsburg Police Department say Sara Seymour, who taught at Brown Elementary School, forced a 7-year-old student with special needs to eat his own vomit."
wtf

Added more context and restructured this post because I wasn't satisfied with it.

Show thread

theguardian.com/society/2003/j
Here's something a Q activist "discovered". An article apparently advocating to legalize viewing child porn.

On it's own, it's a bit weak. It was written 20 years ago, and it was a reaction to a new phenomena.

It's problematic in the sense that it doesn't become "okay", simply because a usage of it isn't causally linked to abuse.

If someone was viewing something which didn't involve actual abuse (hey, U.K. censors got upset over a controversial historic German band cover, although no one has ever been *arrested* for it), this article might've been more persuasive.

That said, what is with these people and their wild conspiracies...

Can't someone just be an obscure writer (seemingly a former academic) voicing a controversial opinion?

What really throws doubt on this Q conspiracy fuel though is as follows:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Lidd
theguardian.com/media/2010/jan
Despite nominally being a "leftist", he holds many conservative positions.

He is also infamous for writing incendiary pieces.

theguardian.com/profile/rodlid
Also, The Guardian dropped his column not long after this article after running it for years.

There is no such thing as "Trust & Safety". There is only content moderation and content policy.

Maybe, I need a lab coat avatar to fit in better here. Lol.

tampabay.com/news/florida-poli
"In a statement, Haas said the State Guard was a “military organization” that will be used not just for emergencies but for “aiding law enforcement with riots and illegal immigration.”"

His most brazen gesture so far in his latest run. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out that this is pandering.

Show thread

Noting that the Australian guy is now attempting to conflate someone, awkwardly, advocating for treating even "sexually immoral" people with respect, and to offer proper due process, with advocating "abuse".

This is very likely a dog-whistle to his Q base.

Oh, I see why a Floridian official might suddenly be "concerned" about sex trafficking, and that Australian guy is veering into Q territory, there's a new sensationalistic Q themed film.

By the way, there is apparently a novel scam now where someone pretends to be an "age verification" service, and takes the opportunity to steal someone's sensitive info.

Thanks puritans.

That is another thing which makes me seriously doubt that spying on everyone with a Chat Stasi would be helpful (asides from other caveats which should be abundantly clear at this point).

Show thread
Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.