Olives @olives@qoto.org

https://qoto.org/@olives/110709878847063472 Another one here

Censorship of games in Australia. So petty, so unwarranted, and so stifling.

A reminder and a warning against things like #KOSA.

Of course, it isn't simply that #KOSA is bad for LGBTQ communities (which of course it is), but that it is likely to stifle all sorts of mature discussions which adults would like to have, and which are actually very important to have.

Or anything which might be construed as "mature".

Since it was brought up, I'm not keen on circumcisions, I see it as an archaic tradition, however, if someone consensually does it, that's their own business.

https://reason.com/2023/07/12/theyre-here-legally-but-face-self-deportation-when-they-turn-21-when-will-congress-act/ Inconsistent standards.

To follow up with Julie's current (or maybe former?) advisor, he has been actively encouraging Q like activities where someone paranoidly runs around looking for "evil" everywhere.

He also invoked a virtue signaller's fallacy, where if a child abuser (an unpleasant crime) worked somewhere, then a virtue signalling position should be taken, rather than a rational one.

This isn't a new phenomena. It's been going on for a few years now.

https://www.refused-classification.com/censorship-timelines/game-iarc/

"Amigo Kebab Simulator"

Australia has banned quite the strange game now. It is one where you run a run-down shop and sell rat burgers, among other things.

Apparently, it contains "references to drugs", therefore the ban. So silly.

Ugh... Is this an E.U. Commission or a marketing firm?

https://reason.com/2023/07/13/we-still-dont-know-the-full-extent-of-the-governments-warrantless-electronic-spying-program/ Commentary on NSA mass-surveillance.

https://reason.com/2023/07/13/david-sosa-says-mistakenly-arresting-him-twice-based-on-his-name-violated-his-rights-other-david-sosas-agree/ Poor David Sosa. This must really suck.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/jul/13/school-in-cat-pupil-controversy-given-ofsted-all-clear-after-snap-inspection Ofsted fails to find imaginary hyped problems.

https://edri.org/our-work/how-eus-plan-to-digitising-travel-documents-might-affect-you/ Privacy at the E.U. border.

https://edri.org/our-work/open-letter-hundreds-of-scientists-warn-against-eus-proposed-csa-regulation/ These people wrote about the open letter.

Noting that censorship in itself can and would cause deaths, and would cause adverse psychological effects for a certain number of people.

Impinging on fundamental rights is not a victimless move.

https://reason.com/2023/07/12/1-year-after-chesa-boudins-recall-is-san-francisco-safer-under-his-successors-more-punitive-policies/ What do you think?

To be accurate, the E.U. Commission which is particularly holier than thou.

E.U. gloating about implementing really irritating censorship (what "age-appropriate design" is a euphemism for) for *everyone* (not just the "children").

Let's see what else is going on. Bringing out a victim to promote authoritarianism. A classic.

Have you considered the ethics of leading someone on, and simplifying every problem down to more blunt censorship?

Imagine running a company and worrying that Apple might siphon out sensitive data or communications with a Chat Stasi program.

This thing is a huge risk surface and someone would be a fool not to treat it as one.

It's such a one dimensional argument and it's hard to articulate just how bad it is.

If I were to cover some points:

1) Someone should have control over what runs on their devices. Programs should not be acting against their interests or without their consent.

In a way, that is the entire philosophy of the free software movement.

2) There is far more room for things to go wrong with a Chat Stasi program, in contrast, the most that might go wrong here is an image being erroneously hidden (with a prompt to make it visible) when it shouldn't be, or vice versa.

3) Apple doing a silly thing doesn't mean they should do another bad thing.

4) Someone doesn't have to use iMessage. They could use another program. Viva la free market.

5) Every argument which applies to the Chat Stasi equally applies to it here.

As expected, a "won't anyone think of the children?" activist is already making the argument that because Apple, foolishly, has an algorithm which hides explicit content in private chats (a feature no one ever asked for), it means it is equally reasonable to build the Chat Stasi.

I could see this coming from a light year away. Disingenuous, yet predictable.