This is a can of worms.
In Texas, they just put the burden of proof on the porn sites so they shut down in Texas.
Will the burden of proof be put on Facebook, etc?
The porn companies said the burden of proof should be at the device.
I could see a comparison of making Ford responsible for preventing under age driving.
I don’t want to give any more of my private info to social media than they already have.
I’m off to buy that coffeemaker that keeps popping up in my feed…
In one respect if they had done anything to protect kids instead of ignoring their own internal studies people wouldn’t feel the need to do things like this…
This is a can of worms.
In Texas, they just put the burden of proof on the porn sites so they shut down in Texas.
Will the burden of proof be put on Facebook, etc?
The porn companies said the burden of proof should be at the device.
I could see a comparison of making Ford responsible for preventing under age driving.
I don’t want to give any more of my private info to social media than they already have.
I’m off to buy that coffeemaker that keeps popping up in my feed…
Or Smith & Wesson be responsible for preventing illegal acts with their product. Sure is a slippery slope once you start.
This is a can of worms.
In Texas, they just put the burden of proof on the porn sites so they shut down in Texas.
Will the burden of proof be put on Facebook, etc?
The porn companies said the burden of proof should be at the device.
I could see a comparison of making Ford responsible for preventing under age driving.
I don’t want to give any more of my private info to social media than they already have.
I’m off to buy that coffeemaker that keeps popping up in my feed…
Or Smith & Wesson be responsible for preventing illegal acts with their product. Sure is a slippery slope once you start.
A slippery slope argument is one where someone argues one event will lead to another without any proof or facts . It’s a bad argument. You seem to be confused. When you call an argument a slippery slope you are indicating it’s not well argued.
This is a can of worms.
In Texas, they just put the burden of proof on the porn sites so they shut down in Texas.
Will the burden of proof be put on Facebook, etc?
The porn companies said the burden of proof should be at the device.
I could see a comparison of making Ford responsible for preventing under age driving.
I don’t want to give any more of my private info to social media than they already have.
I’m off to buy that coffeemaker that keeps popping up in my feed…
Or Smith & Wesson be responsible for preventing illegal acts with their product. Sure is a slippery slope once you start.
Wouldn’t that be more akin to porn companies advertising to minors and suggesting that teachers carry smut mags?
A slippery slope argument is one where someone argues one event will lead to another without any proof or facts . It’s a bad argument. You seem to be confused. When you call an argument a slippery slope you are indicating it’s not well argued.
Pedantic argument. You’re referring to a slippery slope fallacy. A slippery slope argument can be presented where the evidence and logic is presented to link the steps together.
I’d have to think about if it applies in this case, but I agree with the overall notion that Florida has gone after social media companies in a somewhat arbitrary and haphazard way.
I’d much prefer some campaign advocating personal responsibility among children and parents alike. Being more selective about use, setting time limits, and maybe even going through “abstinence” periods. Education and voluntary action always beat draconian ban hammers for me. To virtue signal, I deleted all social media apps from my phone years ago. So I limit myself to occassional desktop use.
I think that there is evidence that supports limiting access to social media to children, and limiting time doesnt prevent the access and exposure issue, so if you can not control what they see then limiting access seems to be the route in the absence of action from the companies
My kids have no phones, 8 and 10, they can have a phone with no social media access but they’re not having access for the forseeable future even though the eldests class mates have them
.
This is a can of worms.
In Texas, they just put the burden of proof on the porn sites so they shut down in Texas.
Will the burden of proof be put on Facebook, etc?
The porn companies said the burden of proof should be at the device.
I could see a comparison of making Ford responsible for preventing under age driving.
I don’t want to give any more of my private info to social media than they already have.
I’m off to buy that coffeemaker that keeps popping up in my feed…
Or Smith & Wesson be responsible for preventing illegal acts with their product. Sure is a slippery slope once you start.
Wouldn’t that be more akin to porn companies advertising to minors and suggesting that teachers carry smut mags?
In law school, everyone would groan when someone would call out, “it’s a slippery slope!†lol
Is social media a dangerous product that requires regulation for the health and safety of citizens?
We have the first amendment which protects speech on social media and porn sites, as well as the right to hold competitions among cis and straight women. We have the second amendment which allows yahoos to arm themselves in case of emergencies, like when your girlfriend wants to break up with you and you’re not ready to end it.
These are tough, tough questions that require the wise SCOTUS to tell what the law should be. Did you ever watch Norseman and see the law-speaker? He wears a special flea-infested hat and makes the law until he dies.
I think I’ve reached the limits of my capacity to look clearly at these very complicated questions. It’s time to submit to higher authorities, including special sheriffs or anyone, really. lol
This is a can of worms.
In Texas, they just put the burden of proof on the porn sites so they shut down in Texas.
Will the burden of proof be put on Facebook, etc?
The porn companies said the burden of proof should be at the device.
I could see a comparison of making Ford responsible for preventing under age driving.
I don’t want to give any more of my private info to social media than they already have.
I’m off to buy that coffeemaker that keeps popping up in my feed…
Mom’s for Liberty must be pissed that they are having the decision on what is acceptable for their kids taken away from them.
A slippery slope argument is one where someone argues one event will lead to another without any proof or facts . It’s a bad argument. You seem to be confused. When you call an argument a slippery slope you are indicating it’s not well argued.
Pedantic argument. You’re referring to a slippery slope fallacy. A slippery slope argument can be presented where the evidence and logic is presented to link the steps together.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Saying this law will lead to gun manufacturers being forced to provide guns so people can protect themselves isnt logical.
A slippery slope argument is one where someone argues one event will lead to another without any proof or facts . It’s a bad argument. You seem to be confused. When you call an argument a slippery slope you are indicating it’s not well argued.
Pedantic argument. You’re referring to a slippery slope fallacy. A slippery slope argument can be presented where the evidence and logic is presented to link the steps together.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Saying this law will lead to gun manufacturers being forced to provide guns so people can protect themselves isnt logical.
That’s not what he said. What he said is that this opens the door for other businesses being held responsible for the bad acts of their customers, including gun manufacturers.
If an internet social media company is responsible for ensuring only customers of a certain age can use their websites, it might follow that a firearms manufacturer could be held responsible for ensuring only customers of proper age are allowed to purchase their weapons.
This is a can of worms.
In Texas, they just put the burden of proof on the porn sites so they shut down in Texas.
Will the burden of proof be put on Facebook, etc?
The porn companies said the burden of proof should be at the device.
I could see a comparison of making Ford responsible for preventing under age driving.
I don’t want to give any more of my private info to social media than they already have.
I’m off to buy that coffeemaker that keeps popping up in my feed…
My only comment (observation) is going after porn will be like going after alcohol in the 1920’s. People on both sides of the isle love their smut. This won’t last long.
A slippery slope argument is one where someone argues one event will lead to another without any proof or facts . It’s a bad argument. You seem to be confused. When you call an argument a slippery slope you are indicating it’s not well argued.
Pedantic argument. You’re referring to a slippery slope fallacy. A slippery slope argument can be presented where the evidence and logic is presented to link the steps together.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Saying this law will lead to gun manufacturers being forced to provide guns so people can protect themselves isnt logical.
That’s not what he said. What he said is that this opens the door for other businesses being held responsible for the bad acts of their customers, including gun manufacturers.
If an internet social media company is responsible for ensuring only customers of a certain age can use their websites, it might follow that a firearms manufacturer could be held responsible for ensuring only customers of proper age are allowed to purchase their weapons.
Glad some-one understood.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Saying this law will lead to gun manufacturers being forced to provide guns so people can protect themselves isnt logical.
My point is that there are valid slippery slope arguments, that is all. I made it very clear in plain English that I wasn’t sure if the slippery slope argument presented was valid argument or fallacy: “I’d have to think about if it applies in this case…”
Does that help?
My larger point is the aribrariness point . We’re not going back to the 1990’s. We’re just not. So children need to be equipped to learn how to use social media in a healthy way. Parents need to learn how to regulate their children’s social media behavior. n=1, I didn’t have television until about age 15. We didn’t own one. I did get to sneak away to friends’ houses to watch a bit. When I finally got 24/7 access to TV, I went through an unhealthy period with it because I was totally unequipped to deal with it.
I think that social media companies 100% need to take a more active role in healthy relationships with social media. Not just children - but adults too . And that can include regulation. But I’m not a fan of Florida’s heavy-handed approach.
What about “good” social media? The autistic kid who has an autism group for social contact because it’s less stressful than in-person human contact? The math club group of Facebook?
A slippery slope argument is one where someone argues one event will lead to another without any proof or facts . It’s a bad argument. You seem to be confused. When you call an argument a slippery slope you are indicating it’s not well argued.
Pedantic argument. You’re referring to a slippery slope fallacy. A slippery slope argument can be presented where the evidence and logic is presented to link the steps together.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Saying this law will lead to gun manufacturers being forced to provide guns so people can protect themselves isnt logical.
That’s not what he said. What he said is that this opens the door for other businesses being held responsible for the bad acts of their customers, including gun manufacturers.
If an internet social media company is responsible for ensuring only customers of a certain age can use their websites, it might follow that a firearms manufacturer could be held responsible for ensuring only customers of proper age are allowed to purchase their weapons.
A closer analogy would be gun retailers, who actually sell to the public.
A slippery slope argument is one where someone argues one event will lead to another without any proof or facts . It’s a bad argument. You seem to be confused. When you call an argument a slippery slope you are indicating it’s not well argued.
Pedantic argument. You’re referring to a slippery slope fallacy. A slippery slope argument can be presented where the evidence and logic is presented to link the steps together.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Saying this law will lead to gun manufacturers being forced to provide guns so people can protect themselves isnt logical.
That’s not what he said. What he said is that this opens the door for other businesses being held responsible for the bad acts of their customers, including gun manufacturers.
If an internet social media company is responsible for ensuring only customers of a certain age can use their websites, it might follow that a firearms manufacturer could be held responsible for ensuring only customers of proper age are allowed to purchase their weapons.
A closer analogy would be gun retailers, who actually sell to the public.
Or is Amazon responsible for injuries from counterfeit products sold on their “marketplace.â€
The high end swim band fakes I got were impressive with their 1 cent carabiner that could have taken out an eye if it let go.
It is a can of worms, but the harm the worms are causing isn’t going away just because we as a nation have largely ignored it.
I don’t think doing this in a piecemeal, state by state fashion is sensible or likely to be effective, especially with the likes of DeSantis at the helm. IMO, it’s long past time that we had a unified, updated federal approach to digital privacy and management of digital harm to kids (and to adults…but maybe we start with the more vulnerable among us). This is a rare example of where I may align on principle with the Florida legislature/governor. I think the core motivation is righteous, even if the execution is likely to be bungled.
As to burden being on Facebook and other social media sites - this isn’t a totally new concept. For decades, COPPA has (tried to) put the burden on companies to manage the process by which they collect & use online data they are ingesting about kids. I can see this kind of legislation being an extension of that concept.
This is a can of worms.
In Texas, they just put the burden of proof on the porn sites so they shut down in Texas.
Will the burden of proof be put on Facebook, etc?
The porn companies said the burden of proof should be at the device.
I could see a comparison of making Ford responsible for preventing under age driving.
I don’t want to give any more of my private info to social media than they already have.
I’m off to buy that coffeemaker that keeps popping up in my feed…
WAIT THIS AMERICA HOME OF THE FREE… whats this bullshit, liberal commie state, doing.
A slippery slope argument is one where someone argues one event will lead to another without any proof or facts . It’s a bad argument. You seem to be confused. When you call an argument a slippery slope you are indicating it’s not well argued.
Pedantic argument. You’re referring to a slippery slope fallacy. A slippery slope argument can be presented where the evidence and logic is presented to link the steps together.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Saying this law will lead to gun manufacturers being forced to provide guns so people can protect themselves isnt logical.
No I think the posters comment, was forcing gun manufacturers, to be responsible for the age of everyone who uses their gun… that’s what Texas law could be headed toward.
Okay, I don’t know how I misread it but I did.
Have a good one.