29 points

Social media, as it currently exists, is a net negative. We’d all be better off without it.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Even Lemmy, for adults I mean? It’s an infinite book of content, or perhaps more like hanging out at a pub after/instead of work, in that it can be misused but does offer positives of connection, knowledge, enjoyment, correction, and more?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Lemmy is slightly better because as far as I can tell it’s not algorithmically run and it’s decentralized. The data does not appear to be for sale although I’m sure AI is using it for training without compensation.

Lemmy is still ripe for manipulation. At this point in time nobody knows if the other person they’re talking with is real or a bot, AI has made the ability to manufacture consent a lot easier and real seeming when it’s not organic.

I personally believe we fucked up somewhere along the line in our tech development

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Lemmy lacks the downsides of other social media platforms and the downsides it does have are mostly shared with them. Although we do lack moderation to create spaces that people feel more comfortable talking in - especially bc reports do not cross-federate (will be added in 0.20 supposedly, and I mean reports to a mod who has an account on another instance). It is what it is. It’s kinda good? :-)

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points
*

It’s unenforceable, so it’s just a distraction. I assume any “funding” for this will just be pocketed by the governor & cops.

permalink
report
reply
18 points

Seems like any enforcement of the law would be a constitutional breach. Crazy the free speech party is passing these totalitarian laws

permalink
report
reply
3 points

The rights of children is more murky than those for adults. Just look at how schools can control speech.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It isn’t, though, we just treat children like they aren’t people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

I think that I, as a person born on Jan 1st, 1900, can circumvent age gates, then so will these kids.

This is a major waste of tax dollars.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

There is research around this that suggests more than half of all children have profiles with an 18+ age.

I recall the most common is to bump their age by 10 years, keeping the month and day the same. Also, many of these are setup with the guidance of a parent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Also, many of these are setup with the guidance of a parent.

👀 ok it’s one thing for kids to be clever and circumvent age restrictions on websites, it’s another thing for their parents to help them. That’s just bad parenting. Reminds me of a friend of mine who’s mom would buy him alcohol starting around 15 - guess what, at 25 he’s a raging fucking alcoholic who threw his life away. And he was a natural talent and athlete who could of potentially gone pro in his sport.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I’m guessing you don’t have children.

Underaged drinking is nothing like having an account that lets them use the full set of features.

Laws around social media do not allow parental discretion. Do you think allowing a 13 to watch R movies is bad parenting or should that be left up to the parent to decide?

Would you blame movies for teen pregnancy?

Do you blame video games for violence?

The unfortunate reality is your alcoholic friend was likely to become one either the way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

It’s Florida, so the rationale behind it is probably to stop kids from getting information that might make them good people or that might help then understand themselves.

permalink
report
reply

AskUSA

!AskUSA@discuss.online

Create post

About

Community for asking and answering any question related to the life, the people or anything related to the USA. Non-US people are welcome to provide their perspective! Please keep in mind:

  1. !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world - politics in our daily lives is inescapable, but please post overtly political things there rather than here
  2. !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com - similarly things with the goal of overt agitation have their place, which is there rather than here

Rules

  1. Be nice or gtfo
  2. Discussions of overt political or agitation nature belong elsewhere
  3. Follow the rules of discuss.online

Sister communities

  1. !askuk@feddit.uk
  2. !casualuk@feddit.uk
  3. !casualconversation@lemm.ee
  4. !yurop@lemm.ee
  5. !esp@lemm.ee

Related communities

  1. !asklemmy@lemmy.world
  2. !asklemmy@sh.itjust.works
  3. !nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
  4. !showerthoughts@lemmy.world
  5. !usa@ponder.cat

Community stats

  • 622

    Monthly active users

  • 155

    Posts

  • 3.1K

    Comments