• sudoer777@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Otherwise it is just the slippery slope fallacy.

    What do you think their intentions are, and why?

    • Archr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      The intentions for the law?

      AB 1043 offers a scalable, privacy-first approach that helps keep kids safe while holding tech companies accountable.

      -Assemblymember Wicks

      This ia a quote directly from the author of the bill link for reference.

      Now of course the obvious question many people might ask is “are they being truthful?” But that is a question that people will have to answer for themselves.

      • sudoer777@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Now of course the obvious question many people might ask is “are they being truthful?”

        Yes that is a large part of what I meant by what are their intentions. If you can reasonably conclude that their that their intended goal will probably involve progressively restricting this area of legislation (whether through implications from their statements or the possibility of them not being truthful), then it is not a slippery slope fallacy.