4 ms·

There's a harm reduction argument to be made: kids are using digital devices already (probably too much) so one way to improve the whole situation is to make us

There's a harm reduction argument to be made: kids are using digital devices already (probably too much) so one way to improve the whole situation is to make using them safer for kids. I'm not a parent, but I imagine controlling your kids electronic device use is a difficult task. The jump to them having a smartphone must be like a dam being blown apart with dynamite.

HenryBemis 5y ago
So our dear FB is helping us get them depressed faster, 'safer', and with a nice blue icon, and we should let it happen? Facebook is cancer. Letting this play out will only condition kids be more immersed/addicted to social media. How can that be good for them now? How can that be good for them in the future? Facebook has proven that they toy with its users, their psyche, their privacy. This will definitely come to hurt them in the future. Either by FB selling out every 1_and_0 they got on you, or allowing 'by accident' another scammy CambridgeAnalyticaV2 to siphon all your data, or by getting hacked and disclosing that 2 years late.
- bootlooped 5y ago
  If you're familiar with any other harm reduction efforts, pretty much the same arguments are made against all of them. Take for example needle exchanges. People who run needle exchanges are not asserting that people being addicted to heroin is a good outcome, only that people being addicted to heroin and also having to share dirty needles is worse. Likewise, I'm not asserting that little kids using Facebook products is a good outcome, only that it may be less bad than other outcomes.
  - agogdog 5y ago
    Needle exchanges aren't willingly run by heroin manufacturers. It's impossible to believe in harm reduction when it comes from the harm producer. I'd be much more willing to accept this as harm reduction if Facebook outsourced the task to an independent non-profit... but even that arrangement comes with pro-Facebook biases.
  - anoncake 5y ago
    Arguably, not allowing children to use Facebook products is easier than keeping keeping heroin addicts from consuming heroin. Also, I doubt needle exchanges actually motivate anyone to start taking heroin whereas getting children to use Facebook products is obviously Facebook's aim here.

HenryBemis 5y ago

So our dear FB is helping us get them depressed faster, 'safer', and with a nice blue icon, and we should let it happen? Facebook is cancer. Letting this play out will only condition kids be more immersed/addicted to social media. How can that be good for them now? How can that be good for them in the future? Facebook has proven that they toy with its users, their psyche, their privacy. This will definitely come to hurt them in the future. Either by FB selling out every 1_and_0 they got on you, or allowing 'by accident' another scammy CambridgeAnalyticaV2 to siphon all your data, or by getting hacked and disclosing that 2 years late.

bootlooped 5y ago
If you're familiar with any other harm reduction efforts, pretty much the same arguments are made against all of them. Take for example needle exchanges. People who run needle exchanges are not asserting that people being addicted to heroin is a good outcome, only that people being addicted to heroin and also having to share dirty needles is worse. Likewise, I'm not asserting that little kids using Facebook products is a good outcome, only that it may be less bad than other outcomes.
- agogdog 5y ago
  Needle exchanges aren't willingly run by heroin manufacturers. It's impossible to believe in harm reduction when it comes from the harm producer. I'd be much more willing to accept this as harm reduction if Facebook outsourced the task to an independent non-profit... but even that arrangement comes with pro-Facebook biases.
- anoncake 5y ago
  Arguably, not allowing children to use Facebook products is easier than keeping keeping heroin addicts from consuming heroin. Also, I doubt needle exchanges actually motivate anyone to start taking heroin whereas getting children to use Facebook products is obviously Facebook's aim here.