How are they going to enforce it, ask everyone their id on every social media platform? Politics these days are just creating "problems" to solve them instead of solving actual problems.
Better to shrug everything like this off, better for your health.
Comment has been collapsed.
ask everyone their id on every social media platform
May sound ridiculous but it isn't far from reality. UK and I believe some European countries do this already. Some US states also do this for porn websites, AFAIK.
Youtube changed how their age restricted videos check works a few weeks ago, so that unofficial front-ends or scripts no longer work. In countries where age verification is law, it is not possible to watch these videos, or even see them in a search, without having an authorised 18+ account. Depending on country, the only way to authenticate is to use real ID.
Personally, I really don't like it. I don't want to make it easier for Google or anyone else to link my real identity to what I do all over the internet.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah a whole country like China can be censored.
Porn sites and other sites i can understand but you know how many social media there is? Facebook, mastodon, X/Twitter, snapchat, tiktok and whatever.
And VPN then?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, it would not at all be easy to police. The definition of "social media" is vague enough. And I can see a service choosing to not officially operate within Australia, so the only thing the officials could do is completely ban access to their website, which most democratic countries would be unwilling to do.
There's no way this law is going to pass anyway, the services you mention would fight it tooth and nail. TikTok would not be okay with losing the mad profits that come from children on their service.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, that's the problem I see with that "ban-under-some-age" thing. I rather like the core idea, mostly out of privacy concerns (considering how kids misuse social media typically to disclose too much information about themselves or their... acquaintances), but I'm fairly sure that in practice it would lead to actually worse privacy, probably with something like mandatory ID verification (because how else can you enforce that anyway).
"Yes, we know it can be seen as a little bit invasive, but it's to protect the children, so, papers please!" I can see this one coming from a hundred miles away. As you point out, that's what Google already does for YouTube. All excuses are good to harvest more data.
Ah, if only parents would... I don't know, parent or something 👀
Comment has been collapsed.
I think so. Facebook asks for your phone # doesn't it? And you can't use one of those fake temporary numbers. I guess you could use a burner phone. Don't really know.
Comment has been collapsed.
well you already need to verify you are 18+ on youtube with your id in europe, so asking for an id is already an existing thing (i hate it tho)
Comment has been collapsed.
The EU is implementing an age verification system via something they call "Digital Identity Wallet. It's going to be mandatory for every Member State by the end of 2026. Spain is already testing it on porn and gambling sites Similar to the "Digital Markets Act" and the "Digital Services Act" they're initially going after the big players and will force them to implement it with hefty fines. The addition of age verification to the DSA and the Audiovisual Media Services Directive for child protection are already planned.
So yeah, in the EU you'll probably sooner than later are going to have proper age verification via an ID on big SocialMedia and Video streaming platforms of any sorts. Also wouldn't be shocked to eventually see it on steam and other gaming stores.
Comment has been collapsed.
More and more control under the so called "for our own good", "for our children" or they just wanna see what people search on porn sites or know how much money you might win for tax purposes?
Enforcing us to use our Digital identity more and more where it was never needed for 30 years since the internet exists as we know it, not to mention how many IT systems fail in their security and this is going to be a big bait for hackers.
Jesus, 1984, Orwell, Big Brother...A few days ago we had this incident where a group of israelian football supporters were heavily beaten in amsterdam, the perps don't get caught, the mayor can just stay and doesn't step down, and i can come with a whole list of other things that's wrong and bizarre. The same witchhunts with jews during the plague and what started WW2...
Sometimes i think this world has turned into an asylum.
Comment has been collapsed.
1984, Orwell, Big Brother
And what's crazy is that it might very well not stop here. If the decision makers consider that the end justifies the means and that the (official) end is to 100% baby-proof the world, why not make it so that using your own device requires ID verification.
Sure it seems far-fetched at the moment, but what Spain (and others) is doing right now seemed far-fetched a couple of decades ago...
Comment has been collapsed.
Indeed nothing might be far-fetched anymore and things most likely get worse, i totally agree...
Comment has been collapsed.
I am 52YO. I was born in an essentially socal media free world, only had to get used to it later in life. Hell, I only was introduced to the internet in the first part of the 90's, when I was already over 20YO. I know who I am, what I want, what my principles are, and how I want my day to be. Not saying anything I say or do is more correct than anyone elses convictions, just saying I know who I am by now.
If I spend just a few hours of watching tiktok, then I'm upset, angry at women, unreasonably pissed off at various things, and love a strange thing more than I've loved anything in my entire life - while none of the mentioned entities have done anything wrong or right towards me, nothing has changed in my life, I have no real reason to be so miffed or excited with things.
However, as a social media relative noob, it is clear to me what is happening, I can feel it twist my emotions, and a day or so later - the whole thing means nothing to me again, and I am back at my "old" self.
Now imagine growing up with this as the centerpiece of your life. You have no previous convictions, no previous moral compass, no own principles, you are just laid bare to the raw attack of input from these hidden others with many agendas - might it be clicks or interactions, or more sinister ones. How should any young, innocent person form a coherent, responsible self in their formative years with such input "helping" shape them?
I'm sorry, I wholeheartedly agree with such "bans". It should not even be a ban, it should really be parental control from beginning, but we see that lacking severely when it comes to online activities. Most parents don't restrict, check, or even seem to care what their youngsters consume online, or how they interact with it, or the effect on them afterwards.
And yes, I know there is also some good coming from certain social media, but without control measures the bad overwhelmingly outpaces the good imho, and I think we should push for similar restrictions worldwide.
Comment has been collapsed.
I grew up without any social media either but then again you fail to grasp that school was our social media. All the things that are happening on social media were just regular crap back in school. Or at least it was in my schools. Dudes busting into the girls changing room during gym, girls flashing or dancing provocatively. People trying to get other people to act or dress certain ways or listen to certain music. All the "factions" like jocks and nerds and whatnot. I don't know what school is like these days but I guess they are all on their phones doing that stuff and mostly ignoring each other even though they are communicating online. Honestly I don't see how any kind of ban would help in any way. All of those "sheltered" kids in convents and cults are way worse off that anyone on social media. And most people who baby their children end up with grown up babies that can't handle the real world when the time comes. I do not know what the answer is but this really doesn't look like it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry, you can't compare school socialising (without constant internet) with Internet Social Media algorithms, this is really far fetched.
Take Tik Tok for example, from the principle it's really addicting dopamin-wise (short videos/stimuli/cues) and heavily affects your reward system of your brain (addicting + shortens your attention span, your ability to concentrate and to relax without stimuli) + the algorithm on the technical side isn't bad at all / much work put into, but you don't know the consequences of it,
like what is shown to you and Tik Tok is heavily unmoderated and used by right-wing extremists, incels, fanatic islamist, alt-right, China, Russia etc. - all those you don't wanna be influenced by, but you probably will. And this risk is high at a young age, like RCSWE said, you are just building your moral compass, your character and many other brain/character-shaping stuff.
So where do you have those scary good algorithms, dopamin-reward-addiction stuff and so many unmoderated stuff with heavy influencing from bad actors in old school socialising, hm? The most unmoderated stuff would be a kid bring in a porn magazine, lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh no there were neo-nazi's and gangs and all manner of recruitment going on in the schools I went to. It was not simply just jocks. Peer pressure is your dopamine factor. Peer pressure is what is fueling your tik tok nonsense and so on. It existed before the internet and it will exist as long as there are people. There was drug pushing and all manner of stuff. I dabbled a lil in peer pressure but figured it was all usury and moved on. Politics is honestly just more peer pressure nonsense, most politicians don't give a damn about anything more than popularity. The internet makes things easier but at the end of the day it is neither good nor bad nor did it introduce anything that did not already exist other than itself.
Comment has been collapsed.
Peer pressure is what is fueling your tik tok nonsense and so on
It's not just peer pressure though. It's literally algorithms pushing harmful content forward to kids who are easily influenced.
Personally I think it should be up to parents to worry about what their kids are doing online but since they are not, maybe that kind of measures being discussed, if not enacted, might get them worried enough to inquire into the content their kids are gorging themselves on at the mercy of a brand's algorithm that literally seeks to get them addicted to their product.
If we were talking about a brand using similar techniques to push an actual physical product to create addiction, people would not even discuss it.
Also I love the internet. But there is more to the internet that social media. Places where kids can learn things and learn to be curious, instead of gobbling up fishy content, and learn to radicalize and stop eating.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure what to do about AI controlled algorithms. I'm sure going after that instead of social media itself would be a start though.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a thought. Although those algorithms are implemented by the platforms and the lack of moderation is also a problem.
Note that these platforms who jumped on the AI bandwagon did not rush to use AI methods for moderation. It's almost like they don't really care how harmful the content on their platform is and they are actually counting on it instead.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are probably right on all counts. I think with enough fines they will probably start to care though. Well something certainly needs to change.
Comment has been collapsed.
Heh maybe we should give people license to parent like they are licensed to drive. But then that probably wouldn't help the birth rate problem. Jokes aside, fines might get people to pay attention to what their kids are doing online. Something's got to give.
Comment has been collapsed.
I could touch on people with serious mental conditions having children but that just seems a bridge too far honestly. And I'm not talking about depression or autism but Downs and other things that prevent people from fully taking care of themselves let alone dependents. And besides if the government stepped in there where would regulation involving parenting stop? All you have to do is look at the past with forced chemical castrations and lobotomies. But the government loves us all and has all of our best interests in mind, or so most people seem to think.
Comment has been collapsed.
I wasn't really serious about the licensing to parent but I think people should get some kind of classes going on when they decide to have children because it seems more and more are dropping the ball and then blaming others when things go down the drain.
Comment has been collapsed.
It does always seem to be a "you" problem and not a "me" problem doesn't it? Again, I'm not really sure on anything but there is certainly a lot of good points and counter points all over the place. I guess this is why most people are happy to sign all the decision making over to other people and let them dictate how they should live life. Which seems scary to me.
Comment has been collapsed.
People always look for a scapegoat and tbh when their kids have died or killed others, it's natural to look for other guilty parties than themselves.
I get your point but there has to be some degree of government oversight to our society. Anarchy is a great idea but it's not a reality. It's also illegal for kids to drink. Nobody is saying that oversight run amok because it's always been like that or long enough that people see the wisdom of it.
Does it solve everything? Of course not. Kids still drink and some of them get into car crashes while drunk but it would be way worse and in fact the number of deaths attributed to drunk driving has gone down since the beginning of the 21st century.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is true that most people have proven incapable of managing themselves and need direction. The way it's implemented just seems poorly done. Not everyone needs it but there's really no simple solution that's for sure. It's certainly beyond my scope. Honestly I try to be impartial when I look at the government and what they do but it is almost impossible. And it's not a Republican or Democrat thing, it's pretty much all of them. It would be great if people who actually cared about people not popularity or money or power got on top but it's a rigged system.
Comment has been collapsed.
While you are not entirely incorrect, school was not "our times social media". It was the real world, and had the thing in it you seem to completely disaccociate: Consequences.
If you busted into the girls changing room you ended up in pricipals office, and all the girls on the school thought you a creep; strong personal motivators to not continue such behaviour, or at least to later in life "get it", why that was a poor choice to make. There's no equivalent precence on social media at all. None. You can do the bad things, see the vile things, encourage some really reprehensible actimns and even get praised for it, instead of being scolded. Yeah, your frineds might've clapped you on tha back back in school telling you what you did was awesome, but due the consequences you never did them aghain, unlike on social media where you don't need to feel ashamed from people calling you out, you can just block them, don't need to look themn in the eyes, nothing reported to your parents.
It's like the famous internet saying "Social media made y'all way too comfortable with disrespecting people and not getting punched in the face for it". It wasn't that we wasn't stupid back then - because oh, we were - or did things that were wrong - because oh, we did - but it was the presence of consequences that "saved" us.
You don't want to be considered an a-hole? Stop doing a-holy things, or have the big brother of whom your doing a-holey things punch your lights out.
You don' t want to be a social outcast? Then don't be *that" guy, just try to be a tad more friendly and a tad less abusive/creepy.
Our surroundings taught us directly if our actions were over the top stupid, weird, or abusive. At least to a certain point.
People got away with shit back then too, it wasn't perfect, but it was wholesale blnaket coverage, everyone got it. And the ones that got away with shit were fully aware that if their actions was ever uncovered, there would be hell to pay, which helped keep it at a minumum, in the shadows so to speak. No need for that online though, just go for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually you might not see it but there are laws and rules in place. People regularly go to jail or prison for causing other people to harm themselves or other via social media or text/email. Also I have some news for you about those predators. Prisons are full of them and they even have prisons and programs just for them. Social media platforms themselves regularly ban people and I think they are even held accountable now for false information posted on their platforms. It's definitely not the lawless land people seem to think it is.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are not wrong, just perhaps disillusioned in the scale of things. The overwhelming majority of people who commit illegal things online are never caught, punished, or even inconvenienced by any legal faculty. Does not matter if that is grooming, writing slurs, just being obnoxious, or if it's peddling drugs on the silk road. The great mass of online criminals/trolls get away with it. It is getitng better, but it still is baaaaaaaad.
But that's not even what I'm talking about, I'm talking about how growing up in an environment like this will shape a person, how it will make them think about the world around them. And then how the inevitable clash will shock them, and create untold issues when they eventually have to venture out in real life where things still work exacty the same as they did when I was young.
That's why I would think a reduction of that sort of influence should be limited (they'll never manage a full ban, people will find ways around) until a person have truly started the journey to think for themselves from a somewhat stable base of self.
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean most people actually get away with crimes off the internet as well. If people didn't get away with things there wouldn't be crime would there? People still do all those things offline, have been and will be regardless of any laws or regulations. As I said people are going to get what they want one way or another. If they feel like they have to make a trip to another country to get it? They certainly will. I have admitted I don't know what the solution is but I still don't believe the government stepping in like this would be. That's not so much about regulation as invasion of privacy and enforcement concerns. And who's to say they don't use it to say certain other persons should not be able to access social media or even the internet? It's a lot of what if's. I certainly think everyone should have their own opinions and voice them so people can possibly learn something. Anyway you certainly have given me things to think about.
Comment has been collapsed.
Uhm, no. When you say something to someone in person, that you woul easily say on social media, the consequences are WORLDS apart. School TAUGHT us how to interact with people. Social media is doing the opposite. Everyone's the protaginist, and no one has to take responsibility for their words.
Comment has been collapsed.
i kinda agree with you, basically because of my parents with my little sister (mostly my dad) he always gives his phone to her already when she was like 3-4, broke multiple phones always gets angry and sad and throws a tantrum when she has to stop using the phone, she is 11 now, doesnt go to school and only thing she does is using dads phone without supervision stays awake till 4am on the phone
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow. Are you parents not concerned, not realizing what's happening or simply just unsure how to remedy the situation?
Comment has been collapsed.
i think a mix of all the 3, my dad just says its fine untill it gets like 2 am but mom my tells her to stop and go to bed but she doesnt listen and mom doesnt do anything further about it lol so basically my lil sis just does what she wants whenever she wants but if its not something she wants she gets angry
happy i moved out recently lmao, but she is a real sweet person besides her phone tantrums tho <3
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe she'll outgrow it on her own then. My gf's niece was like that when she was smaller. Not with phones, with anything. Her Mom was very... laid back when it came to parenting and the kid just learned that she could do whatever she wanted when she felt like it so she did.
Now she's mellowed. She's still pretty opinionated but she is not as tantrumy as she used to be.
Comment has been collapsed.
What a wonderful it was without the social media crap, noone constantly glued on their telephone and you actually had human interactions, and when you say you aren't constantly glued to your phone, people even react like that's weird.
And yes they give small children even phones, which leads to all sorts of physical ailments such as their back/neck getting curved or eye problems (needing glasses) because they stare at their screens too much.
Even with cartoons for baby's/toddlers they engineered it so that they tested baby's on what color a bus should be, how many seconds a frame should last, i can't remember the name but 2 guys earned billions from that model, kids are just being used there as well, from the moment they get born.
Smartphones (with social media) have been a disease, a curse to society, and AI will finish the job where noone can distinguish reality from fake anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well spoken i also grew up in the same era.
And you could allready see the influence on some of the people around you back then with some life experience on their back.
All of a sudden more then often the first search result was considered as a truth without questionening and back then it was the same as it is now. You find what you search for and get confimation for your own echo chamber.
Over time the clickbait titles became the norm and contributed to the extreme polarization of opinions without much room for nuances in between.
I would not oppose the idea to teach the handling and understanding how the online world opperates and aims to influence you in school so they get a understandng how to handle the information they get from it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Early 30s here with parents who were late adopters of technology here and I agree. Social media is an incubator for mental illness amd radical beliefs.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a good post.
2 years ago I had a co-worker, a dude in their late 20s. 28-30ish years old. He kept asking people if they saw on "this new popular social app". He openly admitted he has a FOMO if he doesn't use new apps, together with all other people, and misses the buzz.
Now I have a guy at work who is a few years younger than me, early 30s. He's constantly glued to the screen. He sits and mindlessly scroll Instagram. He can pick up a pen to sign some paperwork. Ding - notification. He will look at the screen. He will unlock the screen. He will just see this one thing his follower sent him. Then he will scroll a few more, still with the pen in his hand like he's about to work. And then after a while, he drops the pen to again scroll like a zombie. This is not a teenager with undeveloped brain. This is someone who aims to be a manager soon.
Adults "who should know better" can't stop wasting time on social media. So how a child could? That's why social media targets kids, to make them addicted to short but steady dopamine shots and notification anticipation. That's why companies were willing to make whole "lite" versions of apps specifically for kids.
There is a good book about the whole issue of "how social media steals our focus to feed us junk, in order to sell us more advertisement". Stolen Focus: Why You Can't Pay Attention.
And throwing everything on parents in "but... but... it's parents job to moderate their kids!". True, and it worked in the old times of TV, which had already filtered content without harmful short clips "new viral challenge, try to strangle yourself in the closet!". When you could control more who your kid is playing with as it was limited to close proximity. And if you couldn't keep an eye on your kid, other parents in the neighborhood would. Nowadays parents are not equipped with the knowledge to fight it. Parents of "old", who did not grow up in social media time did not know of the dangers. Dangers were brought up and documented only years later. Then you have parents who are not IT literate, who may heard somewhere information that social media is "bad", but never thought how bad it could be, and how they could set up parental account. And then there are people who think their kid watching cat videos on yt is not much different than them watching National Geographic when they were teens.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think this is one of those things which are better in concept than in practice. There can be a lot of negative mental health impact from social media, especially on teenagers. This and protection from predators are strong reasons to keep kids off of social media sites. But I’m not sure how this could be reasonably or practically enforced in a meaningful way.
I have seen commercials lately about certain privacy settings being turned on by default for users under a certain age, which are restrictions on who they can contact/ interact with (eg, just their friends). There’s similar issues with enforcement and verification here too, but that feels to me like a step in a better direction than an outright ban.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes this is is my thought. I mean tools themselves are not bad just how you use them. It's an old argument about guns but it is very true.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just like guns though, the issue is more of unsupervised and unchecked availability than of the use.
Comment has been collapsed.
Guns is a really touchy thing. Most people use them for hunting. Less so for defense and a few just like as a hobby. Sadly you have people who abuse it to commit crime but I would say most people don't go around shooting each other even if they own a gun. Sadly even if you take away all the guns it's been proven that people will just stab each other to death or bludgeon each other. It's doesn't matter that it takes more effort, if someone is at the point of killing someone they are beyond that care. Heck a lot of people just mow people down with their vehicle.
Really and honestly I feel the same way with social media and internet. If people want something they are going to get it no matter how much effort they have to put forth to get it. I mean look at prison escape, can you imagine how difficult that is? But people still try and some even manage it.
I'm not saying I am right or anyone else is wrong I just FEEL that granting governments more and more power just isn't the best thing. People can call me naive and conditioned all they want, I am sticking with my thought on that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just like with guns, terms like "personal responsibility" have to stop at kids. Kids are not mature enough to be responsible, that's why the law considers them differently.
Neither here not there but I think guns issues are more problematic when it comes down to mass shootings and accidents, although the number of road rage shootings that end up taking bystanders lives would not happen without bullets in the hands of idiots so gun control would help there.
And I'm not saying that lightly. I have handled guns since I was a kid, I was competing when I was 10 and kept going for years in national competitions. I own guns and I still use them from time to time, and have done so in three countries with gun control laws where mass shootings just don't happen. All this to say I am not afraid of guns, I'm afraid of people with guns but morons or unbalanced people should not have unrestricted access to guns. And guns should be locked in a safe at home to avoid kids shooting each other.
It has nothing to do with giving the government power, not anymore than people getting licensed to drive is about government power, it's about the government stepping in to hold gun users responsible, when they don't take responsibility themselves.
Which brings us back to parents being held accountable for their kids education.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is felons have NO guns rights of any kind. I mean not even a pellet gun to deal with predators or nuisance animals. Not even a crossbow. Do you know how difficult it is to hit a moving target with a standard bow? Or even a slingshot? Most felons are not the violent gun toting pillagers society seems to believe. However gun control via the government precludes any kind of pest control or basic hunting. It's just over, like forever. That's a broken system. I'm not saying gun control is bad but this version of it certainly is broken at best. And this is a federal thing. It's not likely to ever change. I don't think most people think about things like that or if they do they just buy into the whole violent gun toting pillagers delusion.
Comment has been collapsed.
I honestly don't even agree with felons not having the right to vote but I don't generally think it takes being a felon to be dangerous with a gun. Felons can't legally have guns but people with a psychiatric history or under mood stabilizers can. That makes no sense.
It is a broken system, that's for sure but it'll remain broken because the NRA profits from it.
Again, I handled guns as a kid. Safely so. Because I was educated about them. I was using them for target sports and it would never occur to me to grab a gun and go around playing vigilante with it. It's also a cultural problem and that won't be solved with a few laws, I agree.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually felons can get their voting rights reinstated but as far as gun rights go if you can get your record expunged you can "technically" get your gun rights back but again this is state vs federal and the gun prohibition is federal so you would be playing with fire. It is VERY confusing that the second amendment gives you the rights and yet they can just take it away and never give it back. I mean the constitution doesn't really mean much any more does it? You certainly can't replace your government, homeland security has something to say about that. To me it just looks like the government keeps taking power, stripping rights and making it easier to control everyone. Maybe I am wrong and just paranoid but it really does scare me.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hot topic but the only thing the second amendment gives right to keep and bear arms for a "well regulated militia". Regulation is right there in the amendment, before arms are even mentioned.
To me it just looks like the government keeps taking power, stripping rights and making it easier to control everyone
About to be made worse.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is there can be no militia, this is viewed as subversive activity. Even if you looked at the military as a "militia" you are not getting in with a felony. A lot of that might have to do with the aforementioned prohibition on firearms for felons. I mean hell if it would get my rights back I'd gladly sign up for 4 years. I know I'm still able to make it through basic. They definitely have all their bases covered.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, the problem is when the constitution was written, there was no police and barely any military so people had to take care of their own safety. Militias were needed then. They're not now.
Too bad you can't sign in. Maybe you could try the French Foreign Legion. Historically it was open to everyone, even people who were deserting from other armies but I think now they are asking not to be currently wanted by the police.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm over 40. Even though I'm in better shape than most people half my age I am pretty sure they don't bend the rules. It is a nice thought though, a new life.
Comment has been collapsed.
Shame. And yeah they are not known for bending the rules, even though they started pretty much for that.
You'll fnd a new life down the road, I'm sure of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Personal responsibiltiy stops with kids."
I agree and I'm stealing this. Besides, there is a precedent (in America) for the government taking actions to prevent content that would shape impressionable children's minds. I don't remember the specifics, but in the 1990s there was a law passed preventing children's shows from directly advertising toys.
We know now that social media strongly influences children in ways that most people agree is bad (as opposed to it being just a left/right thing), so I think there's good reason to start placing restrictions on it.
Sorry if this is incoherent; posting from my phone.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't remember the specifics, but in the 1990s there was a law passed preventing children's shows from directly advertising toys.
Interesting. I know similar laws exist in Scandinavia. It makes sense especially when you see how much responsibility we can expect from brands where there is money to be made. Kids are an easy target. People talk about online predators a lot but don't realize that they are not all sexual predators.
It's not incoherent. You make perfect sense.
Comment has been collapsed.
Imho it's a good idea for 2 reasons
1 - we all know social media has some undesirable effects on people, and young people are especially vulnerable, so simply removing them from the equation should help. My personally experienced example is realising how addicting online attention can be - I lowered my social media use back in high school thanks to realising that, but plenty of people will get addicted instead.
2 - the presence of kids among adults has long been affecting the adult spaces in how we should act, what topics we should or shouldn't broach and what is the life experience of the other anonymous person speaking.
So yeah, it basically helps nearly everyone who stays and nearly everyone who leaves.
Is what I think.
Comment has been collapsed.
These are very good points. I just think it could honestly be handled better than "let's ban them from using it". That just seems extreme. I mean outside of like perse matchmaking in Halo I don't really mingle with kids and honestly I'm scared shitless of even that exposure. There is a LOT of witch hunting going on and a LOT of thought crimes or "conspiracy to commit". I'm more worried about myself and other people getting wrongfully canned than children.
Comment has been collapsed.
it could honestly be handled better
I mean, that's true for literally every policy in theory vs in practice in the world :D
But sure, I didn't write out a comprehensive opinion, just some general thoughts. However - even if it seems extreme, is it always a bad thing? For example I wouldn't want an exception to banning use of fire near my gas station. But if you want some moderation, I think you could just prevent new registration, and leave ones who are registered there already. After all, they joined under old terms of service which usually allow joining social media when you are 13 and above afaik. Unless you meant going soft on something else, like making a separate platform for <16 crowd.
If I understood you correctly though, the witch hunting is another problem of extremity. I sure wouldn't want to get some heinous accusations for treating another user like a person just because they are a kid. But at least a ban all across the board makes the average person safe from such accusations if they don't go out of their way to mingle with kids, so there's that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Take an old idea, just make them all wear little yellow stars on their profile. So you know exactly what you're dealing with. Nothing wrong with that right? Then you can safely avoid all the je...children. Sorry just trying to make light of a bad situation. But yea I could see how that could backfire, all the weirdos looking for the flagged profiles. I mean it's going to happen even without internet, been happening for millions of years.
Comment has been collapsed.
Here is a bit more context from BBC.
At this point, it is just a proposal to go to parliament. The plan isn't to punish minors or their parents, but to have (I quote here) "social media platforms to show they are taking reasonable steps to prevent access".
So... not sure I have a hard opinion on this at this point. On one hand, I do think social media has too much power on its users nowadays, and should be regulated to some extent (which extent? very debatable); on the other hand, this one screams "I'm a politician, look how I will protect the children". Let us hope the parliament there is able to actually come up with something that is reasonable, enforceable and efficient.
(Oh, wait... parliament... politicians... hm... good chance the whole thing will derail, huh?)
Cheers!
Edit: hey, I did not know that the Australian Prime Minister was Albanese! ;D
Comment has been collapsed.
(Oh, wait... parliament... politicians... hm... good chance the whole thing will derail, huh?)
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok that would make more sense in that context. And believe me I know a lot of bad stuff goes on online but yes it does seem more about politicians/lawmakers making themselves look good than actually protecting anyone.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it might get parents concerned and that's a good thing.
Comment has been collapsed.
There’s always a new evil industry. Today it’s social media. In the 90s it was video games, in the 80s direct to video, in the 70/ dungeons and dragons, in the 60s rock n roll, before that comics, once upon a time radio, before that movies, at one point was music, and even books were deemed a social evil at one point.
Comment has been collapsed.
A good decission.
There are a lot of negative mental health impact from (a)social media, especially on teenagers.
The negative sides from (a)social medias are clearly much bigger as the positive sides, so a better approach would be to close all (a)social media stuff because they create people with more mental health problems, unhappier, more (online) addicted, often dumber and more hate filled in the end.
And the few owners of such (a)social medias get richer and richer and they, plus their companies, act with each year more like a$$holes (Elon Musk is a perfect example).
(A)social media is sooooooo much wasted lifetime, unimportant, unneeded, for the real life. Absolute sad.
Comment has been collapsed.
It really is an addiction but all the negative stuff is going to happen whether kids or anyone for that matter has access. I mean it's just a platform and anything happening there was happening before it was there. I mean it doesn't effect me I don't use any of it but it seems silly.
Comment has been collapsed.
... don't you realize this forum is social media?
Website forums are older than the term "social media," but they meet the definition.
Comment has been collapsed.
I assume it is YOUR defintion but MY definition are definitive different in this point.
Or if it is from a website or book, my definition of the (a)social media is still different in this point :D
You reach here a few hundred people, that is far from a "large crowd" as one main point.
When you use fb, X etc. you reach millions or trillions.
Here are the main focus on one thing "games". Sure you have a bit of other stuff too but that isn't much and in many cases somehow connected with games, PCs, consoles etc..
fb, X, are different which stuff gets shared, talked about, hyped etc..
All that happens here have nearly no effect on the reallife because you don't use your real name, don't reveal which school you visited, which job you learned, at which company you are working, in which town or village you live, which are your hobbies, your liked music, your favorite music etc..
On the, real, (a)social media the most people share a lot, or all, of this informations.
And the (a)social media earn, a lot, of money with the informations about their users.
I strongly assume that cg couldn't get rich with selling user informations from us here (if he could and wanted too, which i don't assume, only to be clear here).
This are only a few examples and i could go on to show the EXTREME differences and the EXTREME different impact.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not really a social media. It's a place online where people socialize.
Social media was not really a problem until platforms like TikTok started using techniques to create addiction, and I'm not even going into the unmoderated content that's available there.
SG is moderated, such at is, but even if there was a thread asking people how they would commit suicide, it would not be pushed to the front of your feed by algorithms and that's where the difference lies I think
Comment has been collapsed.
I think a simple definition of what constitutes as social media is having a feed. Forums have no feeds, which means they do not prey on you. The reader is in charge of the navigation, what posts to click, etc.
There are disadvantages though, for example being more difficult to find good content. But I for one prefer the simple communities.
Comment has been collapsed.
I get why they want to ban kids from social media and to some extent I agree, but I'm also well aware that there's no easy way to implement this without obliterating any of the little anonymity still left online. But yeah sometimes I wish there was two separate versions of the internet, one for minors and another one for adults, that way we wouldn't have to worry about kids even being present i the wider net.
But I guess the best option would be for parents to drill into their children's mind to never interact with anybody online unless they know them from real life, and even then to be cautious. Kinda like how back in the day we were taught as kids to never engage in conversation with strangers and to not trust anyone.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a very difficult thing to be sure. There are GOOD reasons behind it and yet all of this stuff was going on before the internet and it's all going to happen if kids can't even get online. It's just the world. Those actual bad people out there will find a way. Just like crackheads find a way to get that $20 they need for the next hit.
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly it would be far easier to just ban kids altogether, Australia can probably thrive on kangaroos and Vegemite alone.
Comment has been collapsed.
I COME FROM A LAND DOWN UNDER....
YOU CAN DANCE IF YOU WANT TO.....
Don't forget Margot Robbie. Man, she's sexy.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a sensible idea as almost any parent can confirm.
In practice though, good luck with that. I can't imagine how it would be enforced.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't either outside of some very serious and invasive stuff which is why I would be scared of such legislation
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess it's a question of which is more harmful. The social media or legislation against it.
Comment has been collapsed.
In this world? I would say legislation. Tools by themselves aren't inherently harmful but laws and lawyers are another story.
Comment has been collapsed.
And I would say the opposite. At some point, people have to recognize that placing too much trust in people is a mistake.
There's a saying I appreciate that goes like this: "Fences aren't there to keep criminals out. They're there to keep honest people honest."
Comment has been collapsed.
You realize you are trusting politicians and lawyers by taking the opposite stance? I'd rather take my chances in some third world hell hole than trusting politicians or lawyers. If you had 7 years of your life stripped away without actually doing anything you might think differently. Social media is just a tool and I will say that ad nauseum. It's neither good nor bad and it is very easy to turn off. Laws not so much. Even if they are bogus laws that don't actually require evidence.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Social media is a tool" is demonstrably false. It can be a tool, but it has evolved well beyond that, and pretending it isn't a very real issue in this day and age is not something most people would consider doing at this point. You may or may not want legislation, but it has run amok without it. And not just with kids. It's used to recruit terrorists, it's used to heavily impact elections, it's used vociferously to spread misinformation, and it is directly responsible for the truth adverse conditions we live in globally. Those are all facts. It is too pervasive and too invasive to continue unabated.
I do admire the naivety of thinking it's neither good nor bad, but that's just not reality.
Comment has been collapsed.
All of those "facts" existed before the internet buddy. I'm not the one being naive here. Hate groups were recruiting in my schools and that was way back before the internet existed. People paid for advertisements and held rallies to push political agendas since politics and advertising existed, this is nothing new. People are going to buy into whatever they want to buy into whether it's online or not. The internet simply makes finding and connecting easier that it had been before. All of these people and ideas existed before the internet, they were just dispersed. Now they can all gather in online communities.
Comment has been collapsed.
You definitely are being naive. And while there is nothing wrong with being naive, it's not exactly a strong platform for debating issues.
You also just inadvertently confirmed what I am saying as well. All those things you mentioned once required real effort to make happen, and were less prevalent as a result. Now, they require no effort and saturate society.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm sorry these are not counter points and you are just flat out wrong calling me naive but If you want to play the name game I'm thoroughly done with you. People of lower intellect always turn to name calling and violence to "strengthen" their point. Prison was very informative on this point. Maybe you should pack up and get away from social media before it corrupts you any further.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah. The "I'm taking my ball and going home" response. Very noble.
Comment has been collapsed.
You called me naive and wrong multiple times so yes. I'm packing it up, you win. Take your prize and be happy.
Comment has been collapsed.
I accept the prize I always knew I would win.
But yes, the sweeping "gubment bad, people are all responsible humans, nothing requires some sort of oversight" argument is never a winning one.
Comment has been collapsed.
And you just keep on insulting and attacking me. Wonders never cease.
Comment has been collapsed.
The fact that you see that as an insult is a result of social conditioning online. One thing that has gone away is the ability for people to debate without being all up in their feelings.
You presented yourself as naive. I think you'll find that to be a consensus opinion around here whether or not people agree with the premise that social media should have some oversight. Way too many of your talking points stem from "I do this, therefore everybody else probably does this or should do this". Which is demonstrably naive. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.
Comment has been collapsed.
You just don't see how you are being overly passive aggressive do you? And I'm the one who is conditioned. Just accept that you won and move on. Wow. You can't be happy no matter what can you?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm definitely not being passive. Although I would also not characterize my posts as aggressive. They are direct however, and people often confuse the two.
If you're not taking your ball and leaving like you said, just say so.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok this is one of those situations where you just want the last word. Well you can have it. I will add you to the list of people I pretend don't exist because I am up in my feelings. Cheers.
Comment has been collapsed.
parents should just not give their young kids phones without suprvision, my dad gave his phone to my 3-4yo sister and her whole world now is just the phone she doesnt do anything else (11 now)
Comment has been collapsed.
haha yea there are a lot of people out there that their whole life is just on a phone but at the same time it could be worse, there are people out there that their whole life is a pipe and a lighter and that's all they want
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah but the problem is whenever she has to stop she throws a tantrum she is addicted to it like a drug addict, ofc yeah actual drugs is worse but this is bad too
Comment has been collapsed.
I can't really say much, I was the same at that age. For me it was this new thing called video gaming. It certainly didn't make me dumber or ruin my life. I like to game but I manage to live life just fine
Comment has been collapsed.
Gaming is not harmful, and neither are phones. Addiction is.
When it comes at the expense of everything else in life and someone can't live without it even for a few hours and it becomes detrimental to the emotional and physical well being of anyone, especially kids, it becomes a problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
Too true and so is anything for that matter. I'm really starting to see a pattern that it's all due to a seeking of approval or fitting in. Now how to help kids feel approved and fit in is beyond me. Of course this reaches far beyond childhood for most people. I never really felt that need beyond a minimal need for social interaction to maintain mental health but I guess for most people it's a real problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're right, a lot in a growing mind is about fitting in. I don't think there's an easy answer but teaching kids to start with that fitting in and the approval of others is unimportant might be a good first step.
Comment has been collapsed.
I approve the idea that kids should experience life without the burden of social media, so that they can establish healthy and robust ways to communicate, to build trust and relations.
They should be allowed to start their lives without hateful division, so that they later have a chance to reasonably assess what they experience online.
I have no idea how they want to reassure that social media platforms keep kids out but hefty fines are usually a good motivator.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hm that's very true but they are going to experience it all anyway even if people under the age of 18 are prohibited from any kind of internet usage. And I think the whole point of childhood is to prepare for eventual emancipation and dealing with life on ones own. If you remove any hardship from childhood then how do you prepare for dealing with it on their own? Or exploitation etc. I just don't know what the right answer is honestly.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you think about it in the way how we grew up without social media and can handle them just fine as adults now (wait we can, can't we...? Hmmm), we'd realise that it isn't going to harm anyone not going through the "hardship" of social media. Hardship can come in many other traditional forms, which builds character(tm).
By the time they have matured into older teenagers and their brains already formed with healthier values, that could be the suitable time for them to start delving into social media. Or, like some of us, not have interest to go into social media in the first place.
So I approve of the concept, but like others mentioned, it might be hard to implement.
Comment has been collapsed.
16 is still a bit high, this is legal emancipation age in much of the world
most people have some sort of job and at the least figuring out how to manage finances so they can live a "free" life but you throw learning all the other shit on top and people tend to get overwhelmed and lost, turn to drugs and porn and whatever else addiction to cope
better to not shelter your kids in my opinion, help them learn to cope with life before they are at the point to start living it on their own, I mean it's just my view and I certainly don't have kids
Comment has been collapsed.
Democratic government policies have actually begun to copy China's even stricter internet policies.
Obviously, it is a matter of family and school education, but politicians have taken up the issue on their behalf.
The 21st century is unbelievable, and the ideas are even more conservative than those of the latter half of the 20th century.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is a real eye opener. It's a bit of an oxymoron isn't it? Being conservative by being radical in the age of the internet. Boggles the mind.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm absolutely 100% for the idea that kids should be growing up without being addicted to social media. Unfortunately this seems like an unlikely thing in today's world, where so much has become internet centric. Nevertheless it should always be the parents' responsibility to handle this type of issue, not any government to enforce it. The ban is something that is being sold as good and unfortunately a lot of people are buying into it, because "it protects children so it must be good."
Meanwhile the glaring fact that it is impossible to strictly police such a ban without violation of privacy is being glossed over, and that's the part that worries me. People are continuously being lead to be more and more comfortable with losing rights to their privacy, and this "campaign" is going so well that you often see people defending privacy violations with something along the lines of "if you have nothing to hide then you shouldn't be against it." And that whole attitude is just... worrisome, to put it mildly. Admittedly it is at least interesting how fast everything evolved, it wasn't that long ago when you would still "don't give out your information online" as a slogan.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes your second paragraph was what I was driving at. Not so much the fake "protect" the children pitch but the true motive behind laws like this which is invasion of privacy. I mean I'm all for protecting the kids but this ain't it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bit low, but good start. I would set it at something reasonable like 30 and then also ban above 60.
Comment has been collapsed.
but then the internet would be mostly filled with rational people who....wait I see what you did there.
Comment has been collapsed.
Idea is good but how will be executed simply age gate is just +20 IQ test, ID can lead to dangerous leeks and more ID theft.
But problem with social media still stay: 16, 30 ,60 Years old still can develop addition to SM. Schools and society still doing bad job at teaching how use and behave on web (for example: no for sharing private data or how to use IGNORE function)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yea a lot of people don't seem to realize even people who grew up without internet can become addicted to it
Comment has been collapsed.
Good start, but they got a long way to go. Problem is what you do with an entire damaged generation by social media, and if this platform is a problem, then how do we regulate it harder to prevent it doing this to others, especially those who are vulnerable and dealing with difficult situations who might fall for it like a trap, similar to gambling or drug addictions? Still, it's a good attempt if it even goes through, and I hope it does carry worldwide.
PS: You should've added a poll.
Comment has been collapsed.
imagine a world where parents were responsible for raising their children, and not governments and billion dollar corporations.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure such a world exists anymore or ever will again. Well outside certain places. The internet has really opened Pandora's box hasn't it?
Comment has been collapsed.
I think too many parents treat the internet as a babysitter because its such an easy distraction. The internet can be a dangerous place, and a parents responsibility is to ensure their children know how to handle it in a safe way. Pretending it doesnt exist or that 'someone else will step up and keep my child safe' is not just scary, its seriously irresponsible.
stopping a child from accessing certain parts of the internet until later in life is just kicking the can down the road. They'll be just as unprepared later in life as they are now to deal with things, except will less of a safety net.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think too many parents treat the internet as a babysitter because its such an easy distraction.
Agreed. Used to be television but television, while not really helpful to the kids development, had content that is at the very least filtered.
Parents need to either get involved or stop having kids... although that might not be in their hands anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
So instead of, I don't know, implementing education regarding social media and improving mental health practices, they're just going to shelter children from it and then let them loose at 16? This especially screws over LGBT kids, who tend to have to go online to talk about stuff for safety reasons. Other kids tend to go online for help, as well, especially when they don't feel safe going to anyone else. They shouldn't be barred from those resources. Reminder: things like Discord are also social media.
Also, how are they going to implement this? Enforce the use of ID's for social media? I'm sure Facebook and Twitter can be trusted with your full names and addresses.
Tired of all these terrible laws that have no actual thought put into them and being labeled as "for the kids." At this point, they could completely take away everyone's freedom, and as long as they say it's to protect the kids, everyone would support it without a second thought. Banning social media is lazy, ineffective, and harmful.
Comment has been collapsed.
You brought up a good point, I didn't even think about people who utilize social media to connect with others like themselves. There are other things as well like help groups and such, granted you can usually find those offline but still.
Comment has been collapsed.
The issue with those groups is that they aren't available everywhere, and for kids, they would need transportation to them, as well as those groups to not be during school hours. It could also be a safety thing. For example, a kid isn't going to be able to ask his parents to take him to a support group for kids with terrible parents. An LGBT kid can be put into danger by going to an LGBT group. Hell, because it's not as anonymous, those kids might not go to those groups, but would be comfortable going to one online.
Comment has been collapsed.
Social media might not be the best place to look for support, tbh, especially not these days with bait traps but I do get your point.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not talking about posts on Twitter. Reddit, for example, has plenty of support-related subs. And social media is the only way to actually talk to friends online.
Comment has been collapsed.
Reddit offers a lot of support, it's true. Not always useful but most of the times yes.
And social media is the only way to actually talk to friends online.
Is it? I've been online since 1995 and I have had friends all over the world way before social media even existed. There are chat systems all over the internet to talk to friends. Not to make new friends maybe but to talk to existing friends, sure.
Comment has been collapsed.
There are chat systems all over the internet to talk to friends
Yes, and those are considered social media.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well we don't know what the law will define as "social media" but the ones I'm thinking of are definitely not social media. They're just chat rooms.
Comment has been collapsed.
FRANKLY? I agree but less so on predators- and realistically maybe it should go beyond that.
I imagine some time in the future people will look back to our time and wonder how tf we didnt do it earlier
I get the sarcasm, and the idea around predators is exagerated and full of distortions- but come from some right places.
Most people arent predators, but sadly the world do have a lot of them, in diferent degrees and the internet facilitated a lot of things in ways never possible before... but at the same limitedly and id wager the internet age may have turned things worse(for predators) overall. It may be much much easier to stalk, reach, lie with fake personas, get some nudes... but everything points its been harder to manipulate the youth- because with the internet theyre also way waaay more aware, and then we have cameras everywhere, and in our pockets, and the victims thenselves have camera+phones all the time...
People and heck even specialists dont have the full picture of how bad things were. We have exploitation today but things like child prostitution during the 80s and earlier, predators on the streets etc- that part was much worse. By comparison the past was a golden age. Heck nowadays because of internet many predators make rings and share stuff and are caught because of that. Every now and again i stumble at some resumé of some serial rapist/predator in the past, many of them caught at old age or not even that(stuff discovered after they die)- decades and lots of victims and no one had any clue... the isolation helped.
And then theres the panic, from perception, wich is very much real. Like the satanic panic in the US, or the kidnaping panic... back in the 80s awareness about more or less how many kids went missing made parents turn up the panic with reactions and narrative like if it were 10 or more times bigger- what were the normal statistics that happened since forever. 'Oh the times now!'
I see the problem as broader. We have minors thenselves putting thenselves at risk more, or sexualizing early. Heck we have boyfriends leaking nudes for revenge and kids suiciding over that... cyber bullying. Grown up with your feed full of influencers with unrealistic body expectations. Also with the feed full of the horrors of humanity- all the bad news local and global. A war happens youre exposed not only to that but what happens during those, gore and all. Most are well aware of the global warming, had enougth time to see the projections turn real and hotter thenselves, so the projections for the year ahead being even bleaker...
Then theres internet and scrolling addiction ruining attention spans and effing up dopamine, online gambling, gaming addiction, porn addiction, extremist ideology of any and all kinds. Theres chat groups where kids who think about suicide or school shooting share their feelings and others who incentivize (including older sick bastards too). Heck i was at some gaming discord and a user was banned for spamming racial slur, nazi stuff and when he posted gore and black people hanged he was banned/reported- a user i knew was around 14 or something
And then theres brainrot
Gen Z and alpha are showing depression numbers at record levels beyond anything wed ever imagine. If im not mistaken in most countries average scores in education been going down.
Sure theres predators... Too. But statiscally the chances of a predator actually reaching some far away minor in person etc are much much smaller compared to everything else bad happening- most effects wich are affecting ALL youth, not just some fewer digits unlucky victims each year.
I grew up with much less of it- early stages, things were different and slower(even literally slower, bandwith etc)- and i felt the effects. Even my teen self if aware of the whole context would agree with less screen time if that would be better to me.
But idk how to solve it.
NO social media? No screens? Feel too heavy handed, too much, and they would try to bypass etc
But how to regulate? how to reduce?
Comment has been collapsed.
It all existed before the internet so shutting it down wouldn't help. If anything as you pointed out they would just be harder to track down. Beyond that I think it's more of a talk to your kids thing than a let the government strip away my rights and invade my privacy even more than they already do kind of problem. Maybe.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ever tried talking to your kids with the expectation of them doing exactly what you want?
Comment has been collapsed.
Better, I remember not listening to my own parents and figuring things out the hard way. Guess what, I survived and clearly so did you. What exactly makes people think it's any different these days? The internet makes it easier to connect but beyond that all this dopamine pressure crap everyone is clinging to was around millions of years before the internet existed.
Comment has been collapsed.
We didn't have something insidious being part of our daily lives back then. There wasn't even internet when I was growing up, and cell phones looked like walkie talkies. You can't treat different eras as one for one. And social media can be more properly be called social conditioning. It's the refinement of social conditioning and psychological warfare. Which makes sense. Things are refined over time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Are you honestly saying it is easier for a hate group to recruit someone simply because it is done online? I'm sorry but I'm doubling down on that anyone wanting to do something is going to do something whether it's online or not. I might buy into less stable and more susceptible people flocking to the internet but is your solution to honestly penalize everyone across the board? I mean I guess that's what our governments do anyway with everything else.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not penalizing people across the board, lol. It's ensuring that people are at least a bit more mature before they engage. And yes, recruitment is thousands of times easier with social media. It's pretty naive to think otherwise. You ever consider actually looking into rather than just going with your feelings? There is no lack for information out there on the topic.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is an incredibly simplistic statement to make. The internet is a more powerful medium than the telegraph, phones, radio, and TV combined.
It's like being in 1960 and saying cars and phones make no difference to anyones lives. Surely, we've had mail and horses for thousands of years, how are cars and phones any different? And that's being said in a world which has already been irrevocably changed by cars and phones. Just like today has been irreversibly changed by the internet.
You were not subjected to the avalanche of information, advertisements, and crafted campaigns (whether political, ideological, or simply profit driven ads) targeted specifically for you. You didn't watch the news as a kid as they weren't interesting and were created for adults by traditional journalists, any "dangers" you had to worry about were localised to your physical location, you were unaffected by what was happening in another town, never mind continent. Potential bad actors didn't even dream to target you from several countries away, and to hold the kind of information social media and data brokers have today. And be able to track you, see how people like you respond, and get that feedback instantly so it can be used to perfect the next campaign.
To say that the internet will change nothing as "dopamine pressure crap" existed for millennia is to oust yourself as someone with very limited understanding of the power (and threat) of the internet. To say this in current year, when scandals like Cambridge Analytica are well known and blatant misinformation and propaganda services like PragerU exist is to be willfully ignorant.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well I am going to be willfully ignorant then. None of the advancements that have made things easier in the past 1000 years have destroyed the world or society and I willfully ignorantly believe the internet and social media will neither. Not sure what else to say.
Comment has been collapsed.
I did not say the internet will destroy the world, I cannot defend attacks on statements I haven't made.
People completely ignorant on a subject should not make decisions regarding it. If you are unsure of what is there to say, say nothing. Or better yet, ask genuine questions and be prepared to learn, provided you want to. Half of your responses in this thread should not exist if you know nothing and don't want to know anything. And I'm not even agreeing with the law this thread is about.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thats the thing i cant see any good solution.
Talking with the kids obviously is the best first thing everyone should be doing (but i know a lot dont or very little)- but the effectiveness of that alone... im talking all the problens not just predators. Predators tough i feel its the easiest, easy to get, easy to scare(wich is great, so they will avoid traps effectively)
I feel like limiting screen time may help a little with addiction to internet... but im not sure either. But then limiting leads to hidden usage
Anyway, its something that leaves me worried for future generations (im more worried with phone addiction, brain rot, attention spam) and kinda glad i dont have kids yet. But i plan to someday and i dont think things will get better by then... Ffs when i imagine i get worried for the non-existing child im yet to have. Like we cant filter what reaches your kid, or who. In my country it made the news round some investigation started by a school worried that found like 3 chat groups that were full blown nazi ideology and sharing (even translations of main kamptf) that were like 90% middle school teens- and one of them they praised a school shooting that happened and had some kids talking of doing the same.
So that makes me very worried for our future as a species, for starters. But then i think what of the parents? I saw someone blame the parents but like would you know if your kid was in such a group? could you even?
The world is effed up and since the internet is a global almost lawless land, the internet is effed up.
Comment has been collapsed.
I really don't either but I can say with conviction that signing away more power to government is not the way.
Comment has been collapsed.
Gen Z and alpha are showing depression numbers at record levels beyond anything wed ever imagine. If im not mistaken in most countries average scores in education been going down.
Trying to blame social media for this is absolutely wild.
Comment has been collapsed.
Is it? Everything points to a slow but steady rise in depression alongside urbanization post the medieval period- sure we cant be sure entirely on all causes but theres plenty of reasons to believe the pace of life and information overload are tied directly to it. With the times life became more complex, distances shorter, our race against time increasingly shorter- and heck even globalization may have some effect too.
Like the height of the melancholic poets, that happened to happen around an age where people were more aware (and worried) about societys and world problems at large then ever before- because they were increasingly aware. So we went from the hardships and worries from our local peers to now also include the news from far away, the printing press bringing news and discourse that on a high level was holding a mirror to society and with that newfound worries too
And that start got worse over time. We can only infer the further back we go, but accounting from very understandanble spikes (with generational impact)- like the spanish flu, world war 1 and 2- overall things only kept rising, got worse yet again with the cold war, 90s-2000s workaholics... the internet age (before social media)
Its not just depression, stress too. And we cant ever be 100% sure - thats not how science works, we cant just lift some car hood and see precisely wich gears turn what to what amount- but everything tracks so well and makes sense its hard to dismiss. The faster lives we live higher the stress (tied to depression); The more negative toughts, higher the depression stats
Heck just now sumarizing i realized the debates about a 'more depressed age' that became a trend every generation (because the numbers keep going up) actually tracks pretty much with news. Printed press, telegrams, radio, tv, internet.
You know the information we get drives way waaay more attention to DOOM. Bad news. Whats most polemical and worrisome not only sells more, is what people want to know more of- were wired like that, probably an evolved defense (we better learn of what may threaten us as soon as possible= better survival)
And im talking from personal experience too. Ive dealt with chronic depression for most of my life starting at my preteens (never ended so chronic). Taking meds, 1 suicidal attempt under my belt(gladly far behind me). As the social network was caughting on more and more i went head in too. At the time ive made no association but by 'coincidence' that happened around the same age i got much worse.
Only some years later i made the connection- as i was, you know, DOOMSCROLLING - that sure i was bad but after spending time on social networks i felt worse after, wich led me to abandon the whole thing right away. I still have an abandoned facebook i cant even remenber the password. I just quit cold turkey like some people do with cigarrets- and it helped... my depression is chronic but between feeling blue or bad vs feeling really bad id rather take the former.
Sure let me rephrase: the times we live in are the major cause. But how much pressure our world can bring us depends on how much were exposed. At some point its unavoidable- worrying about finding a job, then worrying about keeping it, then amounting bills, politics, etc etc... you know, ADULT stuff
Social media brings all that to teens. I dont say any of that like shining a bad light on gen-z or alpha at all, theyre smarter and way more aware of things, ive met teens fully aware how theres a housing crysis and the bad prospects awaiting for then. You know, happy stuff.
So sure, its the times. But social media is geared to hook us, keep scrolling. Algorithms love the bad stuff.
And then on top of that we also have constant... you know, people. Likes, dislikes, peer pressure, distorted perceptions like unrealistic bodies or everyone else doing well, online toxicity, horrible, terrible debates...
Wild? Really??
Just the other day i was glad i saw some article talking about a new trend of young people exiting social media, some also turning off their phones for long stretches of time. For the same reasons i always noted and mentioned prior.
But sure, theyre wildly wrong too
Comment has been collapsed.
So in other words, you're just guessing that social media is purely responsible despite so many other factors.
But sure, theyre wildly wrong too
Again, you're taking this as proof that social media is the #1 cause of depression. You're also assuming the only reason someone wouldn't want social media is because it's causing them to have depression. You're making so many biased assumptions and taking them as proven fact. Do actual facts not matter at all anymore? Just your emotions?
Comment has been collapsed.
What? This exchange is getting weird
"...Purely... #1 cause..."
I have a problem i recon, i write too much. But in this instance, ironically, both blocks of text were precisely the opposite- im saying a bunch of things (purely? i pretty much try to list everything and some more) and then #1? Where i said that? In my weird way adding context i literally went to previous centuries, so how the hell would that be saying social media was pure cause or first? So what, i was implying social media in the 19th century? This is a very very weird response
What im finding weird is how defensive it sounds, almost like out of proportion. Its the same pattern i see people use in heated political debates, being super defensive, distorting what the other say. Wich i get in political debates, but im failing to grasp why here. Its like im missing something. Btw sorry if i triggered something im unaware of.
Anyway no, i dont pretend nor wanted to point social media as 'pure' cause, nor 'first' (we cant even measure these things). I believe its one of the strong ones(agravators) and i also believed it was objectively so and almost a consensus.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was using your own words. At this point, it just feels like you're trying to argue in bad faith.
Comment has been collapsed.
The impact that social media and influencers have on people and especially the youth can be crazy. Some of the viral trends are just dangerous, and sometimes can be very fatal. The Kia Boys are a primary example of this, they break into cars and then go driving extremely wrecklessly with ridiculous speeds. Another example is Jack Doherty, who will purposely try to piss people off and hide behind his security guards and recently he totalled his brand new McClaren while streaming and texting and hurt his friend in the passenger side and could have killed someone. Then you have people like Fouseytube who clearly have big mental health issues and go on massive meltdowns and hit his employees while streaming. You can find a lot of crazy examples like these on the streaming platform Kick. I can easily see why a country would want to get kids off of social media, but I feel it ultimately should be up to the family to decide what's best for their children. Unfortunately there are some parents who aren't around, don't care or don't pay attention to things. Even with parents/families who are around and pay attention and try to do the best for them, you will still have kids who go out and do bad things.
Comment has been collapsed.
The Kia Boys, Jack Doherty, Fouseytube
The who?
the streaming platform Kick
The what?
Comment has been collapsed.
also hazard games, like pay REAL money to open some box to get some skin etc
thats a hughe problem now
addiction
not only sexual predators or bullying in social medias
kids NEED to be protected
we wont sell them drugs or alcohol but they are vulnerable on the internet
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually we do sell them drugs and alcohol, hell they sell it to themselves. I remember plenty of teen peddlers in my schools. They sell their bodies too. And I don't mean like some middle aged perve auctioning off his daughter at a truck stop. Like teen girls doing things for teen boys for shiny things or because the boy is popular and the girl wants to share that popularity. A lot of people seem to not remember anything about school or just choose to ignore it. None of these problems are new with the internet. And banning children from the internet won't solve them.
Comment has been collapsed.
i would certainly support this had i known how they expect to enforce this. like, will you have to show your photo ID every time you login to an online service? it jus seems that it won't b vry easy to make sure young teens don't have a device with internet capability.
Comment has been collapsed.
However they do it will be run and enforced by the government. Do you really want that? Think beyond the immediate implications of invasion of privacy to protect minors.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just wondering what people think about this. I do understand it's intent is to protect children since clearly most people online are sexual predators. Sarcasm aside this kind of legislation scares me but maybe I am just being silly.
Comment has been collapsed.