🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@Pat

> My objection is primarily about people feeling that it’s ok to make derogatory comments about old people, when they would never make the same type of comments about someone’s race or religion.

And my point is you and most people would make the exact same sort of comments about kids. Applying your logic of replacing the term with other groups and seeing if it is ok "Children should not be allowed on the internet", checks out as a perfectly acceptable term to use based on age, if we can say that about kids we can say it about old people. for the record I am actually with you that we shouldnt judge or take away rights from old people, but ONLY if that coincides with doing the same for children, which I also support.

> Regarding rights for young people, people acquire specific rights as they get older. Newborns have the right to life and to live without being harmed, for example. Some of those are determined by the parents and others are defined by law. In the US, this process of acquiring recognition of rights and privileges continues until a person reaches the age 35, when all of their rights and privileges are fully recognized.

Yes, society operates by being ageist against kids.. we deny them rights because of some claim of mental capacity (even if the individual does have the mental capacity) and say its ok.

So if we are to be fair the logic shoudl apply both ways, We shoudl slowly give a person rights up until they are 35, give them the right to drive at 16, right to smoke at 18, right to drink at 21, right to rent a car at 35.... then we do the same as they get older, at 65 we take away their right to drink, at 70 we take away their right to smoke, at 75 we take away their right to drive, at 80 they loose all rights to sign and their next of keen has compelte custodian rights,.

Afterall if we give a child rights as their mental capacity develops we shoudl therefore remove those rights as a persons mental capacity declines in old age, fair is fair.

(again I dont actually support this, I am point out that most old people accept and even enforce ageism on children so they should be treated the same in kind)

@2ck

@trinsec I think basic signs, rather than full competency makes more sense.. They should really do the same for all languages. Teach kids like 30 words from a dozen languages in elementary school, including sign, that would be cool.

@2ck

Agreed with this... if we dont want to be ageist, and children are the biggest victims of this, then the solution is simple... test to allow access rather than use age... Anyone who can demonstrate they are responsible enough to drive a car can, regardless of age.

But as long as we deny children almost all basic rights due to their age, based on some notion of mental capacity, then I expect old people to be treated the same... the logic is universal.

@Pat

@Pat Of course I did... I reread it and i see no reason you would assume I didnt.

@trinsec While I do think it should be offered as a language option when picking, I dont think it should be required beyond "pick any language, and sign language can be one of them"... Sadly im not sure its useful enough to obligate kids to learn it if they dont want to actually go into a field they need it.

@trinsec I would love to, but aside from a brief moment as a child I have literally never had the chance to use it even once, which is a huge deterrant.

@Pat So you think 12 year olds shouldnt have the same rights as other individuals due to their age... that would be called ageist. If you can say someone should be denied rights because you assume all 12 year olds are not at their intellectual peak, then you are just as bad as someone who thinks a 90 year old should be denied rights because they arent at their intellectual peak.

@SweaterVest What the hell are you on about, you think I wrote the dictionary now.

Also there is an expectation of users of QOTO to be respectful and mature in your discourse, calling named when someone respectfully discusses something with you will not be tolerated here.

@SweaterVest

I never claimed minor and child are the same. I am talking about the **dictionary** definition of child (which dictates the meaning of the word)... It is as follows:

> a. a young person especially between infancy and puberty
>
> b. a person not yet of the age of majority

As you can clearly see the definition does not claim the "legal" source is called a "minor" it clearly includes it in the definition for the word child.

@SweaterVest

Actually there are two equally valid definitions... One is anyone who is pre-pubecent. This of course has the problem that anyone with a developmental disorder that prevents puberty would be considered forever a child, but thats a seperate issue.

The other definition is anyone who is below the age of majorty. In this case it is perfectly valid to consider a person who has already begun or finished puberty to be a child.

@Pat Do you fight just as hard for young people to not be treated different for their age? Do you rally so 12 year olds can drive cars and get licenses or own guns? Chances are you are far more ageist than my comment, as are most people.

Just FYI to everyone who uses our extra services at #QOTO. I will be working on them all day so they mayu be intermitten... but will all be much faster when im done.

@Lunatech right now these are preipheral upgrades to the infrstructure and services.. but yes once I get to core qoto it will include translations and toot editing.

@Lunatech Do you think a 12 year old should be allowed to drive a car, own a gun, and have full self-autonomy like a person of any other age? If not you're ageist.

@Pat Nah their fine, just old people :)

Most of the #QOTO servers are back up for now. Only a few are upgraded but the new infrastructure works. I plan to finish it tomorrow but wanted to bring everything back up so things arent down for the eveningl.

@greg indeed!

A few moments ago docker reversed course on sunsetting free plans and announced they are keeping them! Smart move.

#Docker