this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2026
68 points (93.6% liked)
Privacy
50208 readers
289 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hasn't virtually every single study ever performed on the subject found a strong, direct link between unhappiness and social media use?
From what I've seen, the answer is it's complicated. On avg, you're right, and it prob does cause unhappiness and mental health probs. But there are unique situations where it can be helpful. Ex, people who do not fit norms of thier peers, and find healthy connections with others more like themselves. So it has no single, simple universal answer.
The algos, esp on big tech social media like FB, IG, TT, X, etc, are very much designed to make you unhappy and outraged. Even the data scientists who designed the algos have testified to that fact before the US congress. B/c anger and outrage is the most powerful way to make you engage more. TT's internal research shows the more you use TT, the more probs you have with cognitive skills like memory formation, empathy, and anxiety.
Ofc, the harms of social media doesn't mean these bills are the right way to handle that. I believe we have a prob. But this is not the right solution.
Youtube is a massive problem for boys. There may be a couple of educational things on there but it's adjacent to awful recommended content.
I would debate the value of the "educational" content as well. We certainly aren't getting smarter through the internet. Read a book, find a mentor, stay in school.
Youtube as a platform is trash (in my opinion). Not to say there aren't some gems in there.
I'm not familiar with the channels you mentioned but trust your judgment. I would love to see a platform curated with high quality content.
"Hey mom and dad can I use 'historyTube'" "Absolutely!"
Easy.
The analogies don't really hold. Traditional Broadcasters have some standards. Jackass is Disney compared to the back alley swamp that is YouTube.
Think about the experience of going into a library or bookstore vs. YouTube, the content mix is not comparable.
The algorithms, content scale, and access is another world.
The Australian ban, and proposed bans in other countries (generally I only looked at a couple) aren't targeting things like Nebula though, focus is on large scale user to user platforms.
I just checked out YouTube front page in a fresh browser and it's several tiers below Romantasy in my opinion. You may have a more personalized experience, but the front door of Youtube is... nauseating.
The medium matters as well, the audio, visuals, length, like a sleezy, hyper active content casino.
Anyway, I cheer for any friction added to these tech companies because they are doing so much harm, so anything to slow them down.
But I do get the concerns around IDs and privacy (I personally wouldn't provide any). I think regulatory capture concerns are real as well. My preference would be on targeting the recommendation systems, and also making the platforms liable for content they are broadcasting.
It's not at all comparable. If I go into a library and get a book on fixing cars, the librarian doesn't follow me around suggesting Joe Rogan.
Kids books from the library don't autoplay a pipeline of incrementingly extreme, dangerous or vapid content.
I don't see the value in the data being greater than the cost of administrating a patchwork of varied regulations across the globe.
Speak for yourself. I am, without a doubt.
To a large degree, yes, but blanket bans on social media use for minors will fail for multiple reasons.
On the bright side, young people are learning about circumventing government censorship.
Very true, but that may make things worse down the line. Once they realize that kids are circumventing their restrictions, they won't think, "Hmm, maybe a blanket ban of social media for minors wasn't a great idea." They're just going to double down and say that there needs to be more hardcore restrictions on all internet/computer activity. More sensorship, more data harvesting, mandatory governement spyware in all devices.
Essentially the Great Firewall in China. Many governments have already expressed interest in modeling national internet access after China.
Point 3:
Adults have been making the outside more and more hostile for kids. There's no more third spaces. So like you said, they're removing a third space with nothing to replace it with.
I wonder how much more the Australian ban will be when peer countries follow suite and erodes network effect.
If that is so, which I do not know, the only logical explanation is that people who are already unhappy, for unrelated reasons, are more likely to need to find at least some happiness in their lives by participating in online communities.