In 1800, 80% of the world lived in extreme poverty. Now it's under 10%.
Fact is, the vast majority of the so-called "exploit[ed]masses" rose out of poverty over the same period of time that capitalism established itself as the primary economic system the world over.
So who were they all exploiting, to get out of poverty? Each other?
we can't know how many also choose to escalate because of these outlets.
But we do know that in general, porn doesn't elicit that kind of escalation into real life. If this particular category of porn did cause that, it'd literally be a total outlier.
Same with other media, too. Rape porn lovers aren't statistically more likely to rape irl, violent video game lovers aren't more likely to be violent irl, etc., compared to the general population.
So I think it's pretty fair to hypothesize that, if anything, it would reduce the incidence of real-world offense. Just look at the massive negative correlation between the proliferation of porn (thanks to the Internet), and the overall incidence of rape.
Also, I'm familiar with one bit of evidence out of Japan that apparently showed that child molesters consume less porn than the average citizen, which I was definitely surprised to learn, but once you think about it in the context of the stuff I mentioned above, it actually makes perfect sense.
In all likelihood, fictional 'simulations' like LLMs will directly reduce the incidence of CSA, if anything. If that's the case, I can't oppose such things in good conscience--it'd be pretty narcissistic to put my personal disgust over even a single kid not getting bad touched.
No, the people desperately trying to twist "no good guys" into 'he means these were the good guys' are the ones revising. Obviously.
Or... he said "there were no good guys", so claiming that he's saying Nazis were the good guys is really, really stupid.
"I think all vegetables are disgusting."
"He's saying celery is delicious, guys."
Dopes.
Are you dumb or something? 'Nazis were the bad guys' is not sympathy or revisionism, lmao.
Times New Roman
oversees
Surely you can do better than this
Most of them have a national ID that everybody gets, not the complex mix of IDs that the US has.
That's true, but then on the state level, such could be implemented alongside that type of law, within a given state, and then that state would be set up 'equivalently', right?
Those two things should go hand in hand, ideally within the same legislation, I'd think.
Don't more developed countries have voter ID laws than not? It's interesting to see that this is one metric where 'everyone else does this except the US' is not used as an argument for the change that would align the US with the rest.
Except it's done more to solve it since anything that preceded it, so it's not only not funny, it's a misleading/disingenuous talking point.