Utah sues TikTok, alleging it lures children into addictive and destructive social media habits::Utah has become the latest state to sue TikTok, alleging the social media company is “baiting” children into addictive and unhealthy habits.

  • seaQueue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It also implies that one (the worst one) deserves more attention. In this case we should probably be paying attention to both.

        • killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s possible for more than one thing to be bad, we don’t have to pick just one of the two.

          This is what they said; they implied the root comment was saying that two things couldn’t be bad or only one could be solved. But it didn’t. He said, paraphrasing, “there are two issues and I find this one to be far worse”.

          Ranking issues in terms of how bad they are seems a fairly normal thing to do. It also implies that there is more than one.

          • paintbucketholder@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            they implied the root comment was saying that two things couldn’t be bad or only one could be solved.

            I don’t agree with that interpretation.

            They simply stated that ranking things by “badness” also implies a ranking in terms of which one of those bad things is more urgent and should be addressed first - not that one thing was bad and that the other wasn’t, or that only one thing could be addressed.

              • paintbucketholder@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m merely reiterating the position of the poster you replied to.

                You can disagree with that position, but you seemed to be replying to a position that nobody was even taking.

                  • paintbucketholder@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You were clearly arguing against a position that nobody here took.

                    That means you either lack the reading comprehension to understand what was stated, or you’re purposefully creating a strawman to argue against.