You'd be surprised to learn that geopolitics do not actually mimick family disputes

That's because it mostly doesn't work long term.

Depending on how your brain got wired, self-control condemns you to a life of misery while not being exposed allows you to live a normal life. Of course you cannot ask for societal experience to be tailored just for you but there seem to be a consensus on protecting the most vulnerable people from the most destructive habits. Where to draw the line is for everyone to find agreement upon and if that's not good enough for you, you need to find a safe haven.

Self-control is like a tourniquet on a severed leg, it can buy you time but you need an hospital at some point

Huh?

Most people have perfectly well avoided blowing all their money on baseball card packs or whatever other random "box of randomized items" without enduring a life of misery...

It's not that hard.

> Depending on how your brain got wired

Most people are lucky that their brain is cabled somewhat sanely

Different cultures have access and then value different cultural expressions. Asking why there isn't the japanese Bach is a bit like asking why there is no spanish Lee Changho

You could make the argument of how elaborate is a piece of art but in the case of individuals like that they are so far off from the median person in their culture that it'd be quite hard to see their achievement as coming from their culture instead of their own cognitive abilities. The societies they grew into either fought them or allowed them to strive but that's about it.

I hope you enjoy the superiority high that that comment gave you before it disappear

We are all useful idiots in some context, comrade.

It reminds of the "The optimal amount of Fraud is non-zero" that once ended up on HN frontpage : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32701913

I wonder, is there a legal principle to call-out someone who is trying to exploit the word of the law against the spirit of the law ?

That's called Lawful Evil in tabletop gaming circles. exploiting the law to your benefit, even if it goes against the original intent.

I am sympathetic to your claim but after reading the article it does seem to be a case of overregulation, or lack of flexibility at least. Could you use the examples of the article in order to illustrate how this is bad regulatation rather than overregulation ?

To go in the direction of your claim, hasn't the FDA model often been criticized for how easy it is to comply with for medical devices/complements ?

> CO₂ captured in farm & forestry plant residues, convert it into a carbon-rich, BBQ sauce-like liquid

How much carbon do forestry residues (dead branches, leaves and wood chips ?) take to release their carbon back to the atmosphere through rotting ? How much of that carbon woudl have stayed in the ground (unless there's wildfire) ?

Laws tend to set precedents (that may be used to justify other laws)

Yeah, so should we have something like Chat Control and more, similar regulation(s)? It really is not so far off from banning platforms. I remember when people were trash-talking China for doing this, and now "we" are doing the same thing we initially opposed. I suppose people may only start opposing it when it starts to affect them.

I am also wary of things like government owned encryption backdoors and ChatControl, mostly because I feel like like society should be resilient to authoritarian takeovers (and they always seem to happen much faster than we would expect, we'll see if see the US gets another fair election in 2028)

I am just not swayed by the slippery slope argument because as someone else said, it can be used for anything.

Do we actually have a disagreement? I genuinely have no idea.

I do not care about Twitch and I consider Facebook outright harmful, but I do not think they should be banned. I have not fully read the article, but I bet it is "think of the children", a really old justification for "I want more control", a classic power grab.

"we" do what china did because they're beating us at our own games. It's "free market" until BYD shows up, it's "no regulations" until tiktok shows up

Allowing everything from everyone doesn't automagically make "us" the good guys

> Allowing everything from everyone doesn't automagically make "us" the good guys

I never implied this, that would be silly on many fronts.

Are you in favor of Chat Control or not? Why?

First they forbade kids to smoke, and I said nothing

Then they forbade kids to drink, and I said nothing

Then they prevented kids to watch porn, I said nothing

And when the time came for me to complain about the price of cigarettes and booze, there weren't any kids to say anything.

Or something like that

What do you use, borax? That's been banned in the EU for superstitious reasons.

I think ? You can only buy when it has already been cured I believe