Comment by miroljub

3 days ago

So you basically want to prevent your children from doing what you did at their age?

And you don't mind that freedoms of all of us would be restricted as a result?

And then, we keep blaming boomers for those restrictions.

22 comments

miroljub

Reply
otterley  3 days ago

Yes, in exactly the same way that my dad would want me to only use SawStop table saws so that I don't lose a finger like he did.

As for "freedoms," you're not free to vote or drink alcohol below a certain age. And before the internet, minors couldn't purchase pornography, either. Some people perceive this change as a return to normal, not an egregious destruction of freedom.

  • miroljub  3 days ago

    > As for "freedoms," you're not free to vote or drink alcohol below a certain age. And before the internet, minors couldn't purchase pornography, either. Some people perceive this change as a return to normal, not an egregious destruction of freedom.

    I am not talking about pornography or alcohol at all.

    I hope you are aware that requiring an ID to surf the internet leads to total censoring and self-censoring of the complete internet. There goes your privacy, anonymity, and right to free speech.

    If your country's regime really wanted to address pornography or alcohol, I'm pretty sure they would be able to shut it down without requiring everyone's identity. The issue is, they are just using these topics to manipulate people, and you are failing to that trap.

  • mitthrowaway2  3 days ago

    SawStop table saws still suffer from kickback like other table saws, which is arguably much more dangerous than losing a finger and can even cause lethal injury. The SawStop mechanism might provide an illusion of safety that results in users being less careful with their work.

    I think the solution we really need is age verification for table saws. Of course, it goes without saying that the saw should also monitor the user's cuts to make sure they're connected with the right national suppliers who can supply material to meet their needs, and to ensure that you aren't using the saw to cut any inappropriate materials from unregistered sources.

    • otterley  3 days ago

      Ah, yes, the old "safety mechanism doesn't protect against all dangers, therefore it has no value" argument. Right.

      The door is over there. Take the baby out with the bathwater as you leave. -->

co_king_5  3 days ago

[dead]

  • otterley  3 days ago

    Freedom to do what, exactly? You realize that the extreme opposite of laws and restrictions meant to maintain a working social order is anarchy, right?

    • mothballed  3 days ago

      The opposite of something like Bastiat's ideal of the law is something more like the law of tyranny or law of the plunderer. Anarchy I place somewhere closer to the middle -- better than the law of a tyrant because at least under anarchy the law of the tyrant isn't legitimized even if it still might be enforced by might.