Opt out where you can and let the evil empire crumble under the weight of its own mistakes. Cornered beasts will lash out hard, so don’t go for the killing blow, just let the empire die somewhere in the woods frok its self inflicted wounds and then peace-loving people can step into the void and build a better world.
In the meantime, do what you can to love those around you who you care for, promote liberty, support the innocents working for better change through peace, privacy, rights, speech, technology and so forth.
I know we are discussing it. I appreciate the discussion! You have been civil and a good conversationalist presenting your views with thoughtfulness so far. That’s rare on the socials sometimes.
I mean to drive at the manner of how you would accomplish your stated goals above. By voluntary enrollment of those interested who may agree with your approach? With the ability for those like myself who may live near you and who feel, think, believe and act differently to opt-out? Or by compulsory taxation, or other compulsory inclusion of my family in these services you pitch, with penalty of financial, legal, or violent force? For instance, no ability to peacefully remain in my location of birth and/or circumstance, but to opt out and to choose my own path AND choose not to pay for or participate in your scheme should I choose not to. Would that be acceptable?
I hope you can see the parallels I’m drawing to most regions in the world. I am compelled now to submit property tax and other tax for a similar model to what you describe above against my will, under threats, leading up to and including death, should I refuse to pay them, even if I choose not to participate in my neighbors preferred model. So thus under duress and extortion.
In this scenario, you (my neighbors) would not threaten me or use violence directly of course, but instead would use proxies with more manpower and weapons plus the false cloak of legitimacy or law to do it, which is cowardly and unjust. Beurocratic, legal and police action, again, up to and including violence, imprisonment and death force me to to comply to something I disagree with philosophically, morally, spiritually and logically. Today. Not hypothetically.
So what I’m saying is that I’m more than happy for you and yours to do things your way, even if I chose a different way. I wouldn’t compel you to fund or support my way. I would request you afford me the same courtesy and we could coexist in harmony, or at least not conflict, even if we disagree on approach.
This is not how the vast majority of modern society functions today. Which is why I’m curious about how you would approach your hypothetical model.
I am fine with you disagreeing and forging your own path. I mean that sincerely. I would like to follow mine. We can each see how it works out.
Just please don’t force me to support your approach, financially or otherwise, by using the state/gov or others as a proxy for your personal wishes, and I will agree to the same, as I already do.
Edit: Also, do not use those same levers of power to form a cartel that excludes my family, or those who choose to do it this way from participating in public life. We can all get along with tolerance and respect, despite our differences.
Upvote for the civil discourse and laying out your reasoning.
Prohibition leads to black and grey markets, where what is produced and consumed is frequently even more corrupted and dangerous/risky in its acquisition and delivery than whatever you think of the corollaries in the lit markets. It may also drive more deviant and destructive behavior where they may hide their actions and produce more shame and be labeled criminals.
My only divergence would be that the education planning starts at each individual family level rather than large-scale massive education buracracy, which is what we have now and is failing badly to produce good results.
Maybe once that first order family circle is built strongly, you can begin to expand the circle of influence to extended family, neighbors, friends and community.
Raise thoughtful, moral children. They are going to see porn in our modern society. How they process it has to do a lot with the tools they have to do that. That’s the parents job. Not to pretend a 100% prohibition or firewall can be erected, but to raise resilient children who can thrive and not become irreparably damaged by the things they are exposed to in the world they grow into.
Recognition that they will come into contact with it also does not mean you have to endorse it or present them with it. It’s not a binary thing. Choose how you want to parent and observe the results of different approaches. YMMV.
👍 Yep, it’s sad. I can protect them along with the help of my family, friends and community. If not, I will admit failure and live with the consequences. But it’s up to me to grow up and build skills and learn patience and responsibility, not the job of others.
Parents need to get back to parenting instead of absolving themselves of what they see as a pesky responsibility of raising the children they produce and putting their lives and impressionable minds in the hands of others, then wondering what went wrong 20-some years on and blaming everyone but themselves.
I’d like to see some evidence that F-Droid is less secure (or privacy respecting) than using the big Gs playstore or services, which many, if not most, playstore apps depend on to function.
I mean this sincerely and respectfully. I’d love to look onto it.
Because in my current opinion and approach, if you vet your apps and practice good digital hygiene, then FOSS>GOOGL/Alphabet for nearly everything from a privacy and security perspective.
Edit: if I misunderstood and you were saying don’t use G playstore or Aurora AND don’t use F-Droid, then may I ask where are you getting your apps, other than directly from the devs page or github and so on?
I agree with both of you above. It’s a journey and starts somewhere, but he’s not wrong with the recommendations, they may just be farther down the road for someone starting out.
"Only those who do not seek power are qualified to hold it."
Plato
"In most cases, those who want power probably shouldn’t have it, those who enjoy it probably do so for the wrong reasons, and those who want most to hold on to it don’t understand that it’s only temporary."