26
submitted 16 hours ago by Blaze@feddit.org to c/AskUSA@discuss.online
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] HeartyOfGlass@lemm.ee 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

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

[-] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Parents job not the govt. I fucking hate shit like this.

[-] shani66@ani.social 6 points 4 hours ago

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.

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 1 points 2 hours ago

Most social media is bad for you. I don't think this kind of ban is the right tool. But the idea that everyone would just delete Facebook and Instagram is a dream that will never happen.

The government could break up the megacorps though.

[-] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 7 points 5 hours ago

I hate interacting with children on the internet so this would be a good idea in theory if it wasn't unenforcable without massive privacy violations.

[-] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 2 points 5 hours ago

I've good thing Florida has done I guess. SM is a bad thing and bad for our brains.

[-] ochi_chernye@startrek.website 16 points 10 hours ago

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

[-] OpenStars@piefed.social -1 points 5 hours ago

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?

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 hours ago

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

[-] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Also on Jan 1st, Florida is requiring adult websites to ID users before allowing access. So kiss pornhub and other sites goodbye if you don't have a VPN (because those sites have told Florida to fuck off).

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 8 points 10 hours ago

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.

[-] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 8 hours ago

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.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 hours ago

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.

[-] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 hour ago

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.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I'm guessing you don't have children.

No, and no intention. Irrelevant.

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

Both are addictive substances that interfere with brain development. One you have to drink to affect brain chemistry, the other you have to use. Social media networks are designed to be addictive.

The internet of today is going to be looked at one day the same way cigarettes are today.

Do you think allowing a 13 to watch R movies is bad parenting or should that be left up to the parent to decide?

Not an addictive substance.

Would you blame movies for teen pregnancy?

Not an addictive substance.

Do you blame video games for violence?

I blame violent society.

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

Irrelevant. Anybody’s brain chemistry can be fucked with. Just look at kids going through withdrawal symptoms when they don’t have their tech toys.

[-] reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net 17 points 16 hours ago

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

[-] JillyB@beehaw.org 3 points 7 hours ago

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

[-] shani66@ani.social 2 points 4 hours ago

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

[-] OpenStars@piefed.social 7 points 15 hours ago

TIL that YouTube is considered "social media". I need a minute to process that...

img

- image source

[-] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

YouTube is social media. So is email. It's an online platform where people communicate with each other. Socialisation isn't all food pics and memes. It's the foundation of society. That's why it's the same root word. The law says children can't use the internet to participate in society.

[-] OpenStars@piefed.social 2 points 6 hours ago

The bill does provide some exceptions. According to the bill, the term does not apply to an online service, website or app where the exclusive function is e-mail or direct messaging that could consist of photographs or videos shared only between the sender and recipients.

Email lacks upvotes basically, and an algorithmic feed picking content, so children can still text, chat, email, etc. Although these days even SMS texts allow someone to "react" to messages, though no algorithmic feed and limited distribution list so probably not considered "addictive".

Anyway it's surely just security theater on the part of Florida, while at the same time social media is legit addictive - both are true at the same time.

[-] can@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 hours ago

Community tab with content sections

[-] TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works 2 points 13 hours ago

ah, yes, the "land of the free"

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 hours ago

Free to go to Walmart and buy guns with your bananas

this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024
26 points (96.4% liked)

AskUSA

168 readers
135 users here now

About

Community for asking and answering any question related to the life, the people or anything related to the USA. 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. !ukcasual@lemmy.world
  3. !casualuk@feddit.uk

Related communities

  1. !asklemmy@lemmy.world
  2. !asklemmy@sh.itjust.works
  3. !nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
  4. !showerthoughts@lemmy.world

founded 1 week ago
MODERATORS