Technology
Which posts fit here?
Any news that are at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies or tech policy.
Post guidelines
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
It doesn't matter where, parents parenting will always have better results than blanket bans.
so they shouldn't do the ban? While we're at it, perhaps let's also allow gambling and purchasing alcohol for minors as well since parents should just do the parenting ;)
Let 12 year old drive trucks and own firearms. Hell why stop there, let them work if they want to, and if they get sexually abused that's just because parents weren't parenting, right? /s
There's a difference. If you want to do those things online, you need some way to pay. Those ways involve knowing the person is of age, not perfect but pretty good. That said, I haven't done online gambling in quite some time so IDK how crypto facts into this. The same can't be said about browsing the internet in general. I don't need to provide any info to just go look at things online. I'm not changing that even if my government thinks otherwise.
Also, those laws came about before the internet. It's a lot easier to enforce when it's easy to show someone an ID, and that they'll forget in the next 5 seconds. Pretty sure people would have a problem if they were forced to keep a list of people who did those things.
I'm sure you'll say "but no one is requiring a list to be kept" and that may be true, but how would you know if they are? And that's the problem. We've gotten to a point where there are very few entities we can trust with our data, government included. I don't trust anyone with it anymore. There have been so many breaches I'd be shocked if anyone who uses the internet hasn't had their information leaked. I don't have much choice sometimes though. And it's not like much of my data isn't already out there in some form because I was on the internet back in the mid 90s.
Ban life, it carries the risk of death.
These kind of snarky responses make me question those more reasonable laws too, if they serve as justification for much worse
Haha fair point. Don't know if you have kids but I do - Kids are extremely impressionable. So even without social media, but just online videos, some kids (luckily not my kid) go fucking crazy when you say "no more Minecraft videos". And I know there's a lot of parents that don't take that battle, or that simply just don't know their young teens aren't sleeping but instead scrolling tiktok underneath their covers.
Given how we know these laws are poltical censorship and anti LGBT in intent we shouldn't endorse them
Downvoted, this is never about kids, their goal is always to sppy on adults. See my comment below.
Down voting because we agree? Novel. Yes, it's not about the kids. If it was they'd address it by helping the parents find time and tools to care for their children. Not taking more of everyone else's time. I agree.
I think that the person you replied to is suggesting that by arguing on the authorities terms (that it's about kids) you're legitimising them.
By pointing out that if it was actually about kids. What they're doing isn't effective and shouldn't be what they're doing? That's not legitimization in my book. Believe me I regularly point out that it's bullshit. Lots of us do.
But these bullshit arguments work because there is a problem with social media and unsupervised children. An issue that isn't addressed when all we do is simply point it out that their arguments are bullshit. Because even if the so-called Solutions are bullshit the underlying issue is real. And by not addressing the issue you delegitimize your own arguments. The uneducated will listen to manipulative grifters promising solutions. Simply because they're offering solutions and you're not.
But this is indicative of typical leftist infighting. Not taking the time to understand someone's point or where they're coming from. But attacking them more on the issue that they didn't say exactly what you thought they should say. Or use the more radicalizing terms you think should have been used. Meanwhile fascists and their cult mindlessly amplify each other and get things done. Which by the way is not intended as a personal attack. It's something even I myself am guilty of sometime to time.
Don't stop but the most direct response should be top.
And it does. There are others here who basically posted that sentiment. And if none of those were satisfactory, you could have posted it yourself. Unless of course you're upset that I literally posted first, before them. And that the order is the issue. Though that would be rather inane. But then so is the performative drama farming of announcing downvotes.