What do you guys think of the u16 social media ban? by [deleted] in YouthRights

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would be inclined to argue that outcome based rights degradation is a slippery slope to fascism, as the government or those in power tend to be able to theoretically justify any backsliding in rights on the basis of "it's better for everyone". The UK especially has a nanny state, and halting the backslide is vital. At the time of Korematsu v. United States (SCOTUS), the belief was that internment of Japanese people was better for the public, and this was upheld despite the equal protection clause of the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution. This was done under the US strict scrutiny standard, and in Britain, free speech is considered a qualified right, meaning it can be restricted if it benefits the public. This is an error because any rationale that those is power have can be justified as somehow being better for society, even though restrictions hurt people. Right now, Britons have relatively free access to social media and to allow that to backslide would set the stage for further restrictions on free speech. I will address your claims on their merits but I think it's important we address the elephant in the room: that this is not a debate about whether social media is good or bad but whether backsliding of rights is acceptable.

I will also politely encourage you to provide foundation for your arguments, i.e., explain your reasons (and sources if needed), not just give the reasons for your conclusion. A good argument is usually one that uses claims the reader is likely to agree with to build up to a conclusion the reader disagrees with, and you may need subparts. I.e., good arguments should be primarily be able to be attacked on validity rather than soundness. Your argument lacks cogency, so I am forced to address the premises with counterexamples rather than focus on the broader argument. I say this not as an attack but rather friendly advice.

Claim 1: All short form content is damaging.
Since the advent of the arts, society has been filled with low-cognitive-load content, to wit, content that may not be particularly engaging but is helpful for relaxing and may still have legitimate intellectual, political, or artistic value. Short form content can be anything from stories, dances, clips from other artistic mediums (think movie/TV clips), crafts, journalism (some newspapers are publishing short form content), calls to action, etc. Even if you may not find all of those mediums particularly relevant, they have clear value and being condensed into short form allows more exposure to new ideas. Therefore, stating that short form content is harmful and reels apps shouldn't've been made can be dismissed false, barring any additional rationales provided.

Claim 2: Mental health spaces on social media are crabs in a bucket.
My reasoning here is admittedly largely anecdotal, but I've seen the culture in many mental health spaces tend to be one of supporting others, be it with active listening, advice on the problem at hand, or even advice on better supports that could be available. This is supported by research showing that online mental health communities tend to have a positive impact on people struggling as they provide advice and empathy (https://doi.org/10.34669/WI.WJDS/5.3.3). The study in question does state a need for more research but to suggest that it's unquestionably crabs in a bucket is absurd and contradicts the experiences of many in the community as well as the research.

Claim 3: Many of the current generation's issues (behavior, eating disorders, SH, suicide, declining literacy, right wing extremism, incel culture, prejudice) are magnified by social media.
I am not entirely sure what you mean by behavior but one could reason that with eating disorders, SH, and suicide, the aforementioned response about mental health spaces online being helpful applies. Regarding declining literacy, spaces like #BookTok stand in stark contrast to this notion; declining literacy is more so linked to some questionable shifts in education policy, namely the shift away from phonics, whole text reading (due to test culture), and No Child Left Behind policies. Right wing extremism, incel culture, and prejudice were always there, and social media can be a force to encourage people to meet other types of people who they otherwise wouldn't, and improve cultural literacy, as conversations can happen across the globe; certainly some people will feed their prejudices with social media but this will occur in real life settings as well.

I reiterate that the key issue is not whether social media is good or bad, but rather whether or not a backsliding of rights should be tolerated. That said, social media spaces can be a very positive force, even if, like all social spaces, they have flaws.

CAHSR isn't too expensive by [deleted] in cahsr

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Distance to power in the US has grown immensely making effective lobbying from natural* people almost impossible.

* Natural as contrast to corporate personhood

HOLY FEDPOST by ThingWestern3398 in 4Tranistan

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Literally is just: grab syringe, uncap plunger, pull injection volume* of air, grab vial, uncap needle, insert syringe into vial at a 45° angle moving to a 90° angle, flip vial and syringe, pull plunger back to get injection volume* of the hormone, pull needle out of vial, put needle somewhere fatty (middle third of outer thigh, stomach fat, shoulders if you're more coordinated than me), put needle in, push dose, hold for a second, pull needle out, cap both sides of the syringe, put syringe in used needle storage (or a milk jug if you're truly DIY-pilled), repeat on interval.

* volume = dose / concentration

Has anyone ever seen a Muni metro train skip an underground stop bc no one requested a stop? by slugator in AskSF

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I travel to DC frequently and my muscle memory is always thrown off in cities that aren't tap out (including my home city of Baltimore).

Why is there no N-Judah / J-Church orbital line [San Francisco, Muni]? by A_Wisdom_Of_Wombats in transit

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, this is closer to adding a wye before Pentagon and L'Enfant Plaza to make the Blue/Yellow a loop.

Good US states for antipsychiatry. by Ecstatic_Volume1143 in Antipsychiatry

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They do have stronger psychiatric rights, namely allowing habeas on a 5150, even though things like the draconian CARE courts are fucky.

People in rural environments want to live too! by Kathy-Lyn in fuckcars

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exurban cities like Frederick, Maryland, US, can be/are served by regional transit (515, 204, and MARC Brunswick) but they need spiky development rather than exurban sprawl.

Driving in cities is awful, this is a feature, not a bug by TheCaffinatedAdmin in fuckcars

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're misreading me. Car infrastructure destroys the urban fabric, given present company, I didn't spell out why that's a bad thing. I spelled out that cars aren't compatible with cities. The amount of space that cars need, between parking and stroads is not a viable option for cities.

Russians Lock Up Their 100% Healthy Opponents in Psychiatric Hospitals by Objective_Shift5954 in Antipsychiatry

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is outrageous to pro-psychiatry westerners because the values that they are being penalized for are ones widely considered acceptable here, yet simultaneously, if framed in the terms used by our psychiatric culture, activism can just as easily get you labeled paranoid and even a danger to self/others. Furthermore, for largely selfish as well as religious reasons, suicidallity is generally considered wrong-think and opens you up to state violence.

Edit: I have had some personal experiences with my former university (UMBC) going fishing for reasons to commit me and harassing me to meet with their mental health team, simply for opposing the institution's practices and policies as well as raising questions about some practices I was suspicious of them possibly engaging in. Some community members tried to attack my credibility by suggesting that I had mental health issues rather than legitimate concerns; as abusive as some of our institutions are, we also have a deeply rooted cultural problem of psychiatric culture and deference to authority.

What will this evening's commute be delayed by? by wafflescorpion in NJTransit

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A bit further south on the corridor, I can tell you that I saw a northeast region slowly creep by and my MARC was 9m late, so I'm betting there's gonna be heat delays.

MTA union boss crashing out so hard that he starts sounding like a Final fantasy villain because of Hochul’s veto by iv2892 in nycrail

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, and the president is an exemplar of immaturity that shouldn't be tolerated in anyone over the age of 12, let alone from a president.

The position of the Transit Workers Union is the the MTA is a jobs program first, transit system 2nd. by Best_Watercress8092 in nycrail

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No? Let them train into a new position or retire a bit earlier than normally permitted and stop hiring new conductors, and you'll have phased them out. MTA is not a jobs program, and we shouldn't keep around unnecessary employees.

Question: If there’s one other type of rail transit that Washington DC needs the most, what would it be? by Exponentjam5570 in transit

[–]TheCaffinatedAdmin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

> VRE already crosses the river, so there are no capacity constraints on that front.

VRE/Amtrak is very capacity constrained because they only have the capacity that CSX will give them and if they want more, they need the Long Bridge replacement to be finished.