Hacker News Reader

> It's an idiom to succinctly describe a chain of causality.

Right, and the fallacy is that it's being pre-attributed to a sequence of events that hasn't happened yet.

Again, it's a boring argument and adds nothing to the discussion.

The point is not that one thing never leads to another in this way, but that the possibility of a future slippery slope doesn't support an argument by itself.

It is absolutely not a fallacy, as Naval Ravikant points out, given the large numbers of slippery slopes that have played out in the historical record. I have no idea why the belief that it is a logical fallacy is so widespread.