[toomuchequate]

>I wonder what makes people believe that the internet should be this sort of "law free" place where anyone can implement all the exploitative behaviour which is otherwise forbidden elsewhere?

Violent crime doesnt happen on the internet. The only thing to prevent is fraud. And that weirdly isnt huge, at least in my life.

Not everyone subscribes to the thought that government makes better decisions than individuals. Having laws are often used for corrupt purposes.

[TheBranca18]

>Violent crime doesn't happen on the internet. The only thing to prevent is fraud.

I couldn't disagree more with these statements. Human and sex trafficking occur through the net, hell you can hire hitmen! Then there's the grooming of underage kids, etc. To say only fraud happens on the net just seems wild.

>Not everyone subscribes to the thought that government makes better decisions than individuals. Having laws are often used for corrupt purposes.

This is a pretty general statement. What specifically in the proposed law are you against?

[Kaiyou]

All those crimes happen offline, though. Internet is just a communication channel.

[addicted]

Why do some people have to jump from

Person A: I think in these situations the government action has been effective

To

“Person A thinks thst government makes better decisions than individuals”.

There is literally (and I mean this literally) not a single non crazy person in the world who thinks the government makes better decisions than individuals in general. For one thing, we don’t have AI yet and government is made of individuals. Yet this is your counter argument, and probably what you think people who disagree with you believe and rest their philosophies on.

[bambax]

I must be crazy then, and so are many people. Smoking less, driving more slowly, are better decisions than the alternative; but left to their own devices people will make the wrong decision most of the time.

[kaolti]

Isn't this sort of similar to the motorcycle helmet thing? Is it okay to make helmets mandatory by law or are we okay with people being free to do as they wish and so some percentage of us dying because of it.

There's always personal responsibility no doubt - and I'm very big on it -, but at the same time, should we allow corporations to exploit most of the population through addiction?

I don't think anyone can predict consequences of either choice in the short / long term.

[tehjoker]

It's not that "government makes better decisions than individuals" it's that unorganized individuals do not have the power to change the behavior of large organizations that are out to manipulate the public. Corporations manipulate individuals and entire populations by only providing the means for certain actions to be taken, by using propaganda, and in the case of UI, preying on the impulses of individuals.

By contrast, state power in this instance is exercised after deliberate thought, and in theory, in the interest of the people. This isn't the thoughtful and well informed decisions of individuals vs that of the state. It is that of our weakest, most impulsive moments vs making an informed decision before allowing products to be sold or made available.

[JeremyBanks]

Dang