Devin

c-span

Here.

LET LOVE IN

And public backlash toward the problem areas will likely lead to desired changes by the company.

I'm not defending the use, I denounce the use, I defend the access to cocaine.

This video just conveniently popped up, I'm not really into Alan Watts but to me this is the crux of our differences on this issue. I agree people will suffer from TickTok but aversion from all difficulty or suffering isn't the path I would choose, not that you can actually choose it anyway. I support getting the word out about the harm, publicly shunning it, but banning will have negative repercussions I think. With public pressure the owners could alter it obviously.

I don't think you're that, I was only referring to the solution. I apologize. I think TickTock is often dangerous, I'm not disagreeing with that.

I think the action required is public discourse about the problems like we're doing right now, along with better parenting, the infantalization I keep referring to is not just of the children using the app but their parents as well. Banning the app is the government parenting the children, which infantalizes the parents by subconsciously signaling they don't need to think about parenting because the government does it for them. So in regard to cigarettes and fast food, how do you think society as a whole evolves and develops toward what we want? I think it does it through having problems like cigarettes and fast food, I don't think Tony Robbins or Sadghuru type lectures or books are what do it for the society we're working with.

Yeah I agree people will get harmed, addicted and not recover, BUT, without TickTock are those same people going to lead a life within the realm of what you would want for them. My schtick here is really the law of unintended consequences, your intentions are good but I think you're overlooking the grander picture of infantalisation. My comment on cigarettes and fastfood was actually coming from me seeing a benefit of society going through those issues, I think we're coming out of them better than if they were banned. Yes many individuals were severely harmed by them but society grew from it and would have regressed to more infantalisation had they been banned.

Do you think society would have been better off banning cigarettes and fastfood, or letting society learn they need to think for themselves more and not trust salesmen and ads? When something is banned everyone's agency is taken from them.

@Danioover9000 Do you really think the majority of people will continue using it in a destructive way after they figure out the problems? Like do you think we should ban fast food? This sort of social fascism infantalizes society, it's like "The government will keep me from making any mistake therefore me no need to thinky.".

I don't think TickTock is the Achilles heel.

Thanks for sharing, I'm wanting to do a fast like that and never considered that problem, nice for the heads up.

? To all guys whining, complaining and having a full mental breakdown over some comment criticizing Leo on the internet, GROW A PAIR OF BALLS. Stop being so defensive. Grow some thick skin. Don't be pussy.

That wouldn't be sexist.

Yeah it will make a huge difference if combined with the normal dating stuff.

I'm saying that "hypothetical opinion" is biased, you being "biased to all" does not make it not biased. Only the yes answers to " "Women do / are xyz": " are generalizations, the only non generalized yes answer would be is a woman a woman (the definition of a woman). And any bias at least shows a proclivity toward bias, and to the point about sexism, this is a 22 question test called " sexism toward women", it's not like it's a random question on the SAT. Short tests are short for a reason, short questions get more test completion. It's obviously just a coarse measurement.

That's all typical, I say it's from believing your enjoyment is rooted in your circumstance, particularly what society deems an enjoyable circumstance, that's bullshit, enjoyment is always an option in every circumstance, life cannot take enjoyment from you. The "kicking to the ground" has also always been tied to that same belief as well for me, it's always desiring what society deems I should desire or be or have and then I'm "kicked to the ground" because I don't, maybe it's something different for you but it's always that bullshit for me.

Behave this way? We're talking about virgin shaming, when they're virgins in their youth they deserve shamed? You're talking about something different right?

The test doesn't rely on generalizations, I was saying you're wrong, it is in fact bias, you don't know even half a percent of the population so you couldn't possibly know that "everyone exaggerates their problems" it's a belief biased from your limited experience even including studies and statistics you've read, it's still a bias.

He would also get chastised in conservative universities, and China town, anyone that stands out in any setting is usually found out by the heckler.

I didn't say not to interject, I said parent which means interject, that doesn't mean banning it though it means parenting as in teaching your child and role modeling, the kids on ticktok aren't of parents meditating, doing yoga, gardening and cooking, they're from parents yelling at facebook on their phone while shoveling in mcdonalds on the couch watching something heinous on television.

That wasn't the reason for the post, it was a hit piece to try to dissuade people from following Leo, he just showed that example to try to prove toxicity. I think he's done this before under another username, he has the same mannerism.

In the UK? You're supposed to be prudes. In the states the only time I've heard that is from idiots, and it's rare, except for with those particular idiots.