Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That's an inapt slippery slope analogy. The supposed bastion of freedom, the US, still has states where books are banned. And abortion is functionally banned.

Not all freedoms are the same. Losing one doesn't equate with losing all of them. Equating the freedom to become addicted (or indebted perpetually) is not the same as the freedom to read or travel, etc.



Who gives the right to define something as addictive and therefore, bad, and other stuff as not and therefore virtuos. Why do we got the right to moralize some stuff as being "an slave of a substance". Aren't we all slaves of water, nutrition, companionship, shelter? Why do I get to feel superior to the cocaine user?


> Who gives the right to define something as addictive and therefore, bad

Data. Decades of data and the societal costs of ignoring addictive substances. The rest of your comment is a set of false equivalencies.


Heard the same from other moralists for quite some time about marijuana. They had tons of "data" about the societal costs of it.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: