I can definitively agree on the explanation stated infering the second point. However, it is an aspect which needs further clarification, like op said: “someone else’s skin” is usualy interpreted as human directed (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/someone). This essentially introduces double meaning within the argument.

In terms of vegetable tanning your best knowledge is correct, it costs more as it requires substantially more time thats why it is only used for higher end or artisan leather. Additionally, I have stated synthetic tanning which is comparable to vegetable, but not as bad as chromium.

& the original person’s comment about chromium-salts looks spot-on, & was ignored by your counter.

In regards to that, can you provide relevant information which details it?

While the conclusion of this argument is valid your premises don’t follow a logical sequence. Firstly, leather is defined as a material obtained from rawhide which is tanned (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leather) - this is real leather, there is no need for calls to ignorance here.

Secondly, what do mean by referring to “someone else’s”? Because the common usage for such statements usually mean human, not non-human animals. This essentially looks like an emotional appeal at this point.

Thirdly, you state that it is common for leather to be coated in plastic. While this is technically correct - as large portion of the market is composed of reusing scraps, it dismisses leather production from virgin rawhide and processes using vegetable or synthetic tanning which don’t need plastic for the resultant product.

The packaging was just a taster for what’s to come, I.e. discrimination leading to fascism.

I agree, social media is harmful for all, no matter the age. We shouldn’t be destined to further segment and disfranchise individuals solely because they’re “inferior”, based on age or any other discriminatory factor - the thing is, who is the victim and who is the abuser in this case? Because the situation at hand seems like the victims are getting punished for the wrongdoings of the abuser.

This is where we are at, the corporations flipped the script, and we as a society gulped it all down, tightening the handcuffs around the wrong hands.

But besides the point, relating to the logic within your statement, who are you trying to ban here? Because you mention both “everyone” and “them” - which consequently makes it ambiguous, which introduces double meaning.

Also, the system is not predatory, there are simply predators in the system

I’m just going to leave it at that. Glorifying capitalism is onething but adding discrimination to the mix, and the insifignificance of experience, and the apparent need for fascism to protect the kids and eliminate the need for parenting is absurd to say the least.

The fact that predators are enabled to flourish within the system, while minorities are suppressed and their rights stripped is exactly why that statement is invalid.

Yep, it really seems that all that money goes into coehersion so everyone uses their proprietary format. It is hard to actually come across high quality video releases that are in AV1 - even if you prefer the loyalty free nature of AV1.

But in terms of hardware, AV1 is getting more popular. For one, it is a relatively new format.

Thats what ambiguity enables, a logical fallacy that allows evil corpos to do as they please. And thats basically capitalism, or even feudalism at this point.

To be fair, having experience in OSes from childhood is certainly a life lesson to the upcoming years within teenhood and adulthood. I’m not undermining this attribute, as within a world of complexity, having any experience already puts you further than most.

Please stop trying to justify fascist laws. Ageism is still discrimination. And like people, without prior experience it is quite logical they will be susceptible. This of course applies to anyone any age.

The only problem here is the predatory system that is designed to exploit people. The victims are not the predators so justifying how their rights should be stripped based on an arbitrary number makes this whole argument insignificant.

Like other types of discrimination: racism, sexism, there are other ways than to introduce more social segmentation which always leads to fascism.

Actual studies say

The general consensus is the studies say that usage of devices impacts everyone. Let’s not cherry pick a particular minority here, just to explain that stripping their already insignificant rights is a good thing. In addition teenagers, which are not children, are dismissed here. According to studies they are more similar to adults in therms of decision making capabilities - dismissing that is ageism.

I think no phones until 18 would be doable

This is essentially the same speak as the laws trying to ban privacy for all. First of all where is the consent? Also, what is the sense of punishing the minority for being who they are, stripping their rights, if the perpetrators are still unharmed? In essence, phone and laptop usage wouldn’t be so bad for anyone (not just kids or teenagers), if we focused on the actual problems not turn to discrimination.

as a child

So you where under 12, when you learned how to use Linux?

In general, I do agree with controls set on children, locally by the parents that is - excluding teenagers.

Rhetorical questions aside. Let’s not counteract a dystopia with another dystopa here.

Exactly, children and teenagers are meere tools.

Like all the previous fascist waves, they all centre around discrimination. It is about taking advantage of the societies inherent discriminatory behavior, in the past this was mainly racism - in this case however, its ageism.

It is the fact that anyone young is treated as a subclass citizen or in fact not even a person. ID laws are examples of fascist unjust laws which consequently invalidate the freedom and speech of young people. Our society rewards infantilization of others, and it shows how truly ignorant and adulcentrist we all are.

Finally, I don’t believe all of mankind will look back, as all the cases with fascism is “ignorance is strength”, so tracing the problem back to our societal ageism and discrimination will only be done by a select bunch.

Marriage on its own is a problematic concept. The problems with child and essentially teen marriage are the tip of the iceberg.

It is the case where thousands of people past the common age are still being abused. And even within countries where the children’s rights have been ratified, those individuals are yet again prone to abuse when they reach the arbitrary number which is the common age.

child driver’s license Well, teenager, but that’s still a child

Not to be pedantic, but make up your mind here. A child is physically unable to drive nor do anything that requires complex thought. A teenager is not a child, both by definition and by physical aspect. This is essentially ageism, by infantilizing teenagers, including your past self. Especially, since you’re correlating adulthood to that particular time period later on.

I agree, we shouldn’t be painting false pictures like this. The hard truth is that being an adult is objectively better, no matter what experiences you had during childhood or teenhood.

The thing is, romanticizing lack of rights is what truly is the problem here, this isn’t focused on the age - but the lack of control. Its usually this aspect which is included in these “childhood romanticism” posts. Age relation is just the consequence for this lack of rights.

Ultimately, autonomy should exist for all people - no matter the age. This is particularly important for teenagers which seem to be constantly ignored within society. Failing to understand this is what will lead to another “Australia style” blanket ban.

The thing about these comparisons is they are usually one-way, disregarding some of the more important aspects within the current situations.

It’s such a common occurrence on the internet

Let’s not project the blame on the internet. The problem is everywhere, the rampant misogyny is out of control within all dimensions. The system is designed to indoctrinate and churn out misoginy just like racism and ageism is.

I do appreciate that you are refering to “most” guys rather than being age specific; also the rampant rise in mysoginy isn’t their fault. It is helpful to look at the big picture, to realise that men and women of all ages are forcefully fed propaganda used to further divide us all.

They are infantilising people by making excuses that this is for the children. Teenagers may also be under 18, yet they don’t seem to care - they’re lumped right in with clueless children.

Teenagers are also people, and are closer to adults where they have their needs and wants. This goes against their safety, by duming them down. Its only a while since theyre going to consider under 25s as children as well - “for the peoples own good”.