On: Dating apps face questions over age checks after r...

[gregoriol]

The apps are tools, it's up to the humans to do or not do stuff.

In these cases, how are children getting in first? Where are the parents of these children??

Then, it's not the apps that create abuse, but the users on the other side. There could be a set of rules that the apps should make users agree with, and remind from time to time, like be kind, don't get angry if it doesn't work out, report strange behaviors/underage profiles/illegal stuff if you happen to detect one, ...

Is it that complicated to be adults in 2019?

[lmkg → gregoriol]

> The apps are tools, it's up to the humans to do or not do stuff.

Technology changes what it's possible for humans to do or not do (or more often, make it qualitatively more/less feasible). Tool-makers should not take it as axiomatic that they have no responsibility or involvement for the ways that their tools impact other people's lives.

[kayfox → gregoriol]

I imagine that teenagers will figure out how to get around the age checks, and then it will escalate.

[klodolph → gregoriol]

> Is it that complicated to be adults in 2019?

The people in question are very literally not adults.

[purple_ducks → gregoriol]

> The apps are tools, it's up to the humans to do or not do stuff.

"Guns don't mass murder people, humans do"

In the real world, if I saw a child go on dates with a grown adult, I'd alert the police and have the man arrested, then I'd do my damndest to have the restaurant shut down for facilitating the grooming of minors.

And most importantly, _in the real world_, we all have visibility of this and society as a whole acts in disgust and would (legal or otherwise) punish the offenders and people who facilitated and accommodated this.

> There could be a set of rules that the apps should make users agree with

A pinky promise maybe...

[hackinthebochs → purple_ducks]

>then I'd do my damndest to have the restaurant shut down for facilitating the grooming of minors.

You lost me there. This is an entirely unreasonable burden.

[purple_ducks → hackinthebochs]

You don't think an establishment has a legal duty to report child grooming that occurs on their premises?

I used the word 'dates' (plural) - a re-occurring thing, not a one off event.

[scottlocklin → purple_ducks]

I'll bite, how is a restaurant supposed to figure out which groups of people are "child groomers" as opposed to something more pedestrian and normal like "parents?"

[purple_ducks → scottlocklin]

You've never once seen something and felt something was a bit off?

You're never able to read a person?

You don't think people working in a restaurant can't put 2 & 2 together and come up with 4 more times than not?

So, you see a person come in with different children repeatedly and act above & beyond affectionate to them. Inappropriate caressing/touching?

You don't think that's gonna set off alarm bells in the staffs' heads?

[scottlocklin → purple_ducks]

So, we're gonna rely on the psychic powers of witch hunting cretins who work in food service; what could possibly go wrong?

I don't know what planet you live on where we need to deputize the country's wait staff to catch child molestors who meet their victims on match dot com and bring them to restaurants, but I don't want to live on that planet.

[isoskeles → purple_ducks]

> "Guns don't mass murder people, humans do"

Yes, that is true, even though you are being snarky. In fact, guns don't mass murder people, humans, put together into larger organizations (typically governments), do.