this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
643 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

59689 readers
3856 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] scaryjelly@lemm.ee 12 points 1 day ago

Only for 16 seconds? Why?

[–] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 12 points 1 day ago
[–] WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago

Good. Now block Shitter.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Probably going to get downvoted for this, but this just makes kids look for VPN's and other ways to skirt this restriction. It may make VPN's less useful for the rest of us as a result when certain services are forced to comply with the law, breaking those services for those of us using VPN's. It sounds like a great idea but I don't know that the implementation will make a noticeable or effective difference.

[–] cybermass@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Most kids are not going to pay a subscription for a VPN, I don't think that would be as big of an issue as you think.

[–] Thorman1@lemm.ee 24 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Well unless they go for free vpns and get data mined to the moon and back... Which is a far worse outcome imo.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

No, they're gonna download "free vpns" and get infected with malware and turn their device into part of a bot net.

Or use Tor and end up finding things worse than just "social media".

Are the government gonna ban those too?

Congrats, you now live in China where the all benevolent government have 24/7 surveillance to keep you safe.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Eh, I don't think this is the best solution.

The assumption is as soon as you turn 17 you're smart enough and have the critical thinking skills to navigate social media without it negatively affecting you? Kinda dumb.

There could be an argument that at least try to block it while young peoples brains are still developing, maybe there's benefit in that.

Older people than 16 are still duped by propaganda, and become addicted to social media, and all the negative consequences.

What we need is regulation imo. Good, smart, progressive, altruistic regulation that is for the benefit of all. Ain't gonna happen though, because sOcIaLiSm and "mUh FrEeDoMs".

[–] Australis13@fedia.io 3 points 22 hours ago

Yeah, there are adults (in both my generation and the previous one) who have fewer critical thinking skills than today's teens and young adults. This feels like a band-aid solution to avoid actually fixing the problems of (1) not teaching critical thinking and logic and (2) the toxic content, misinformation and disinformation on these platforms (I recognise the second one is much harder whilst trying to preserve security and privacy as well).

The older generations always think the younger generations are lazy and lesser. They don't believe they can parent because they know how shit they were at parenting. So they are voting to take away parental rights and give those rights to the government. And then say they are pro small government.

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 14 points 1 day ago

Not a bad choice.

[–] Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee 11 points 1 day ago

So what? There will be a "Yes I'm over 16" check box which will be as meaningful as the "Yes I'm over 18" one on porn sites?

Any hope of governments or social media sites enforcing this will come with big ethical and technical compromises and I dont think anyone is actually going to really bother.

We already have limits on what children do with other potentially harmful things like fire, sharp objects, heights and roads and they all come from parents. If this law has any real and positive impact it will be the message that it sends to parents.

[–] lung@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Then I read that chat apps and YouTube would not be banned, and scoffed

Literally chat apps are social media. You can post stories and pump memes and news. You can even have bots that scrape and post content. YouTube is just a matter of checking a box whether it's "for kids" and they already do that. Basically the whole thing is stupid

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago

So even in perfect scenario where this ban "works" it would still have zero intended effect as teens can consume all of that rubbish but not talk back and can jolly continue any harm on "allowed apps" like wtf is even this supposed to do lmao

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›