Share.

    26 Kommentare

    1. It causes the exact same problems in adults as it does young people. Do yourself a favor and ditch the mindless media injections and talk to your friends directly, not through a manipulative corporate idea filter.

    2. AnotherMisanthrope on

      Parents should lead by example. This will only drip with big “do as I say, not as I do” energy

    3. eliceev_alexander on

      It seems there was news from Australia where it turned out that a similar ban was easily bypassed by teenagers and children and that this did not solve their problems at all.

    4. Heavens, we certainly wouldn’t want a LAZY solution to a huge gathering of ills! No, it must be expensive, laborious, and ineffectual.

    5. xGenghisSwan on

      Imagine needing to use something once you become an adult, but because it’s so dangerous for everyone, you’re not allowed to learn and practice with it at all as a child. Instead you only get to practice and experience it when there’s the least amount of legal protection for you, the least amount of guidance and support, the least amount of accountability from your society if you get harmed. From not having it at all to “good luck and it’s entirely on you if you get fucked up by it”.

      This is not an acceptable way to treat humans but especially children. If I was a child having this done to me, I would never stop hating the generation that decided passing the buck to be children’s responsibility once they age up instead of fixing the fucking problem at the root was the right way to go. These laws are a total abdication of responsibility by enterprise and government alike. Social media algorithms are by and large cognitively and emotionally damaging. Turning 18 doesn’t change that, why are we feeding our whole society to a misery machine and arbitrarily deciding there’s a magic age when it’s an acceptable evil?

    6. TheWesternMythos on

      Ban better than no ban sure (well **depending on the details of course**)

      But the debate is the „tool dilemma“. Do we ban gun? Drugs? Social media? Each have their uses (protection/hunting, treatment/management, learning/teaching) and even more risks. 

      The actual answer is to teach and „enforce“ aligned behaviors. But align with what? Teach and enforce how? 

      Much easier to blanket ban and hang a banner than tackle actual issues from a systems perspective…

      Also a lens how I see social media in the timeline:

      At first power was power (I’m stronger than you) 

      Then money could buy power (I have mercs/an army) 

      Then influence (ideas/rhetoric) started being able to generate more power (let’s get rid of the monarchy!) 

      But also money could be used to improve the machinery of influence (printing press, telegram, internet) 

      And money could be used to buy influence ecosystems to shape it towards one’s objectives by influencing the influencers (fox news, Twitter) 

      Next money is still being used to improve the machinery of influence, instead of relying on influencers to hopefully do what you want, the goal is to have a system more capable than an influencer doing exactly what you want (AI) 

    7. Go_Home_Jon on

      This just in… Politicians who take social media money, think social media ban is bad!

      „But don’t worry our „studies“ find no actual connection between their opinions and their wallets.

    8. DeLoresDelorean on

      Experts also questioned safety belts in cars. “People die in accidents anyway, why bother.”

    9. raisamit209 on

      Limiting social media usage is important, but without the platforms regulating the content and algorithms its only a partial fix

    10. I have to admit that sometimes when I get on social media I am shocked by how toxic it can be. People have no respect for you each other anymore and people have no filter.

      I love the freedom of speech but some people think it’s a license to say whatever they want and however they want.

      The internet sometimes can be a lot to stomach as an adult, I don’t think it would be a bad idea to limit the age when people are exposed to it.

      I don’t mind kids being sheltered a bit + limited exposure to the social media aspect of life. Sometimes I’m even in shock as an older adult to the content and the toxicity It takes place on certain social media sites.

      I was not one of those people who lived a sheltered life and I am not one of those people who is easily shocked . However I still very surprised at which some people communicate at. I know the kids are going to find out the hard way but at least we could give him a few years during those developmental years of not having to deal with internet trolls and people with nothing better to do with their life than create drama.

      We don’t send them to war, gambling, alcohol, or all the other things that are age restricted. Doesn’t mean that they don’t do them or they won’t do them but maybe we can just slow them down a little bit and let them be kids for a little while longer. I don’t think it’s a bad thing. It might be a good thing if maybe the kids were outside playing with their friends and having a good time rather than sitting around on social media and using that as a form of socializing rather than making friends in person. Call me old-fashioned call me a gen Z.

    11. redvelvetcake42 on

      Any ban of anything just moves it into a place where it will be accessed in secret. It doesn’t stop it from being accessed.

    12. Grimlockkickbutt on

      The laws are just “give corporations all your personal data” laws with a “save the kids” coat of paint on top because the average person really is just that dumb. I predict “save the kids” acts over the next decade to include re-institution of legal slavery and corpse farms.

    13. I remember seeing a study that essentially said kids would rather hang out in person than online but only unsupervised without an adult looking over their shoulder. For the most part, the only in person opportunities they have areunder direct supervision by parents, teachers, coaches, or other chaperones and they’d rather hang out unsupervised online than watched in person. So I think social media is toxic, but like any drug addiction, if you don’t offer an alternative to fill whatever deficit the drug is compensating for in their lives, it’s not really a fix to the problem.

    14. DoctorKonks on

      Bans are indeed lazy and is gross over regulation when you consider the laws likely affect „social media sites“ like Wikipedia or any forum who don’t have the resources to pay for ID checks. What needs serious reforms are the algrorithms and not just for kids either. And yes, Reddit is social media.

    15. justbunnies on

      It’s lazy, but a great way to grab personal information through age verification and then selling that data to people who want to use it for nefarious purposes! Hooray!

    16. Unlikely-Estate3862 on

      Headline is like saying banning smoking for those under 18 is lazy…

    17. # READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE. Christ.

      <rant>

      Most posters to this point have gone down the usual route of *Verification’s a slippery slope* or *Parents need to do this*, but clearly haven’t read the article. The bit worth taking away is:

      >Social media needs to be more closely regulated across the board. You can’t launch a new drug into market without a review, social media and AI should be treated the same and governments have failed at that.

      Her challenge is that those more difficult actions have been missed, so a ban is a simple way of making a change. The authour rides this off the rails because it’s not perfect, but we should be looking for progress over perfection.

      There’s no doubt that parents should be all over their kids, but saying „it’s totally up to parents“ is said by people who are missing what’s going on, or are invested in remaining ignorant.

      </rant>

    18. My_leg_still_hurt92 on

      come on, the parents already had to make them you can’t expect them to take care of their education too.

    Leave A Reply