Comment on Someone Forked Systemd to Strip Out Its Age Verification Support
cmhe@lemmy.world 10 hours agoWhy do people so often invert the burden of proof?
If someone says “Picking your nose will cause brain-cancer in 40 years.” Then they have the burden to proof that. Nobody has the burden to disprove that.
They made the accusation that this is a step to make this age fields mandatory, and controlled by third-party age verification services, so they have the burden to proof that there is way to do that.
I find it highly unlikely, because most people using Linux systems at home have admin privileges. Which makes this whole point moot, since they can fake whatever they like to the software running on top.
Senal@programming.dev 9 hours ago
I know, right ?
Absolutely, and if you’d asked for proof of their accusation you’d be correct in this instance.
They did and you could ask them to make a case for that, you didn’t.
You provided your own accusation:
And proceeded to tell them that they are required to provide proof to dispute your new accusation.
Which is what i was addressing specifically when i said:
It makes the field itself mostly a non issue in the single isolated context of “does this field, on it’s own, constitute age verification”.
The point most people are trying to make is that it’s a part of a larger context.
cmhe@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
You are seem to disagree with yourself… On the one hand you say I should ask them to make a case for their argument, but on the other I’m not allowed to ask for proof.
But instead I need to provide a proof for… them not providing proof that their argument is not a non-sequitur? Crazy…
Senal@programming.dev 21 minutes ago
You did not.
I’ll try to make it simpler.
Ask for proof of claim they have made - YES
Ask for proof of claim you have made - NO
if you suggest something is a fallacy , that’s a claim youhave made.