Unintended consequences? Of what? Living like it’s 2010, before the slow build up of mass enshittification of everything that’s on the internet since then? Sure. I’d rather have kids playing some video games - ones that likely will teach them some skills rather than doom scrolling and being fed algorithmic AI slop.
Calling the consequences “unintended” is debatable.
Implement parental controls instead of dystopian surveillance
those already exist. parents don’t use them overwhelmingly.
my sister’s kids have had theri phones locked down since they got them. limited screen time, only approved apps, etc.
literally none of their friends parents are doing this. the kids feel like their parents are abusive and cruel because they are depriving them of something everyone else has
Turn them on by default and make adults have to turn them off with each new phone. It’s an easy fix without a surveillance state.
Exactly this, when the kid turns 16 they can get the parental controls turned off.
Those kids don’t realize their parents are helping them.
Shit, if they think parental controls on devices are abuse, have I got some eye opening life stories to give them
Unintended consequences, like being happier, having lower suicide rates, and being less manipulated by toxic corporate advertising?
Don’t threaten us with a good time.
I’m not handing over my ID and info to whatever data collection company simply because I want to potentially view something on social media.
You believe sites just magically know who’s under 16 or not? because if you do I got some ocean front property in Kansas to sell you.
It’s not magic, it’s very simple, and it’s what Pornhub et al keep calling for: device based verification.
You do it once when you set up your OS / OS Account, and then your device can anonymously tell websites whether you are are old enough or young enough without sharing any other info.
And if it’s happening at the device level, that means that credentials and actual paper IDs arent even required, you just need a system that lets parents lock down a child device to only use their account, and set that up with their age for them (or have one of their teachers do it).
Reality: data breaches and censorship with age verification.
Or everyone refuses and big social media sites die. Return of the blog.
Unfortunately, this won’t happen, because the people most interested in social media tend to be those with the least interest in privacy and least understanding of data breaches and how to prevent them. Would be nice, though.
I think they’ll start wanting privacy once they get arrested for dissent
Being nabbed for dissent requires having a strong opinion on something that’s at odds with the preferences of the Powers That Be, and not being afraid to speak up about it. I would guess that that’s only a small percentage of social media enthusiasts—less than a third, and I’m being generous there.
Reality: you make your money off being a social media hack who pushes outrage for clicks.
I very well might have killed myself when I was a teen if it wasn’t for support I received from people online. Social media isn’t the problem. It’s the predation by the execs who want to squeeze out every penny they can that is. A youth ban doesn’t fix anything. What we actually need is regulation on the companies (not the users) and easier access to mental health resources.
Congratulations on being an outlier.
Social media increases the rate of suicide overall though, in addition to creating increased feelings of isolation, increased inattentiveness, increased levels of rage, increased levels of political polarization, etc.
Quite frankly you have absolutely nothing to base your claim about it being a corporate problem on. There’s no evidence that Lemmy / Mastodon / Pixelfed’s “neutral” algorithms are any less toxic or soul destroying then Facebook or Tiktok’s. I personally suspect they are to some extent, but it’s also very clear that many many many people are simply addicted to rage and will find and create it online regardless of algorithm.
I claim it is a corporate problem because of things such as Meta detecting when a teen girl deleted a selfie and then showing her beauty ads.
Also these kids are going to get older, go on social media, and then have the same problems. But because they are older it seems like people don’t care about them anymore.
Also social media is really useful for minorities, such as queer people, to find community and support which is especially important if they happen to have bad parents or live in an unsupportive area.
I claim it is a corporate problem because of things such as Meta detecting when a teen girl deleted a selfie and then showing her beauty ads.
Yeah, that’s real evil and fucked up, but the reality is that even before doing that, Facebook / Instagram was still leading to a noticeable increase in the suicide rate of teen girls.
Also these kids are going to get older, go on social media, and then have the same problems. But because they are older it seems like people don’t care about them anymore.
That’s like saying that you should let teens smoke cigarettes because they’ll get older and get exposed to them anyways. There’s inherent benefit in delaying exposure to harm, especially when your brain is developing and changing so much.
Also social media is really useful for minorities, such as queer people, to find community and support which is especially important if they happen to have bad parents or live in an unsupportive area.
I do get that and am very sympathetic to that use case. However, on balance, it still fucks up more kids then it saves. I think the appropriate middle ground is device / account based age verification without requiring IDs and documents. Then it at least leaves the door open for an older brother or concerned community member to get a kid who needs an outlet an unlocked phone, while still more broadly discouraging it’s use and denormalizing it.
I am not entirely opposed to a ban for those under like 13, but I feel like 16 is too high. And I also wouldn’t support a ban until they have a way to address the negatives it would cause, which they don’t have atm.
Right now it feels more like the trolley problem except all you know is that people are on both tracks but you can’t see how many until after you decide whether or not to pull the lever.
Maybe people will actually develop some media and technology competence instead of just using what’s easy and what everybody else is using. One can dream.
They won’t, they never do. The huddled masses are largely selfish and care about doing what they feel like not what is wise. They are, in many respects, the greatest enemy of things improving.
Tyranny of the default. It’s a thing and most people don’t change default settings from anything. He’ll why don’t people use ad blockers it is so easy.
they don’t know ad blockers exist.
When you set up devices they ask who’s using it.
You’d have to be illiterate to not be able to solve this yourself.
Funny thing, about 20% of the US is illiterate.
