zlacker

The viewing of particular visual content being restricted by some religion, etc is a different argument from visual content somehow designed not to be viewed - by anyone - being created. The former is a matter of opinion, the latter a pointless paradox.

>>skeled+(OP)
The latter is also an opinion, because the people who decide to create videos are also fallible human beings…

Unless you believe it’s impossible for someone to have contradictory or incoherent intentions?

>>Michae+eq1
Nothing about opinion or fallibility here. The latter is theoretically possible, but practically senseless. In a very literal way. There is 0 purpose to have something visual that is not intended to be consumed visually. What is a picture that is never seen? This is actually very similar to the philosophical question of whether or not a tree falling in a forest with nothing to hear it makes a sound, but this isn't philosophy we're dealing with.

>>skeled+S15
“0 purpose” according to who…?