BranBucket

We already have that, and it has solved absolutely nothing while potentially making online surveillance and privacy issues worse.

The answer isn't age-gating or ID verification, it's changing how the sites themselves operate. Get rid of the idea of "driving engagement", no more stealth ads, and no corpo, media, political party, or lobbyist accounts. Hold influencers and podcasters to the same kind of standards we used to hold journalists to, where they're required to tell you when the're shilling for some kind of shady supplement company or political huckster.

You know, the kind of shit any sane species would do with this sort of tech, but when have we ever been sane?

This is a wild-ass guess, as I'm no religious scholar, but Paragone's profile pic appears to be a statue of The Buddha, the emoji may represent the way Buddhists hold their hands together when bowing.

Daily: Wallet, phone, house key with folding reading glasses and pill container on the chain, car key (separate because I don't like the way the key chain brushes my knee while I drive with everything attached), a couple of those plastic flossers in a baggy, lens wipes.

Often but not quite daily: "AAA" sized penlight, small pocket knife w/ screwdriver and scissors, and multipliers.

A four year degree, for the most part, proves you can hand in coursework and pass tests. It does not demonstrate the ability to apply any of that education in the real world, nor does it demonstrate any ability to acquire and apply new knowledge outside of a classroom setting.

When you look at careers where the application of knowledge and critical thinking are vital to the work, all of them tend to have some kind of post-graduate schooling or follow-on apprenticeship where one works under an experienced professional, and even people in those fields can be pretty fucking stupid when it comes to things outside of their specialty...

I believe this is what the c-suite types are referring to as "innovation".

What if, instead of trying and failing to kick kids off social media, we focused our attention on the reasons why being online is so often detrimental in the first place?

Pre-fucking-cisely.

Do you have to pay extra to get someone to sit on your sandwich like that...?

I'm not sure how I missed this. It's so obvious when you think about it!

I chuckled a little.

I took it as her being aggressively kinky and provocative to tease and embarrass her uptight partner, nothing says one way or the other as to if she's really into that sort of thing or just messing with him since he clearly wouldn't go through with it, and the punchline being his flustered and mortified reaction rather than just the sexual innuendo.

But the artist wasn't shy about playing up the horniness and titillation either.

However, that's not the only way to look at it, and it's not like we're dealing with Shakespeare here.

Nothing can be maintained without at least some of the skills and knowledge that built it. Even something like generative AI like LLMs will eventually break down in some manner. Its just what happens with complex systems, be they physical or digital.

After that happens, we'll be forced to learn either to fix the thing, or how to do without the thing. How painful that learning process is will depend upon how essential that thing is to our lives.

If AI goes away in a few years, barely a blip.

If AI goes away after a few decades, and we've allowed much of our accumulated knowledge to atrophy... It's a crisis.

Why should the regulation allow for more surveillance of users and data collection instead of outlawing the practices and algorithms that lead to many of these issues on the first place?

They've been trying to tie devices to identities for years now, and doing so allows them greater leeway to fuck with people's heads, to spread propaganda more effectively, and to target dissent against themselves and their allies. This doesn't protect people from having their mental illnesses exacerbated, it just allows their disfunctions to be shaped in the direction tech billionaires want them to be.

In my opinion, anything that uses an algorithm to drive engagement by presenting material designed to play on the emotions of the user should be outlawed outright. Video ads and paid content should be identified with title cards at the begining and end. Images and posts should be marked with headers and footers that make it clear this is paid content.

If the user decides to subscribe or block certain content, that's the user's choice. But the timeline should always be based on time and date or activity and never influenced by paid advertisements or engagement.

And that's the bare minimum. I still consider that somewhat risky to interact with. If I had my druthers Facebook, Xitter, Reddit, and the rest would all be shuttered and taken offline next week.

It's like being able to say dumb shit like this without feeling self-conscious demonstrates that your thinking has a sort of ethical ambiguity about it that means you'll go along with whatever to make the shareholders and your fellow c-suite drones more money. It also seems like it could be sort of a personal thought-terminating cliche, as in, "I'm not going to think too hard about the effects of the next round of layoffs, because a more efficient company will make more progress, and progress is moving forward."