4 ms·

Yeah, but why not also ban candy, soda, junk food, video games ect? If we can't trust parents to parent their kids then why not ban everything that possibly co

Yeah, but why not also ban candy, soda, junk food, video games ect? If we can't trust parents to parent their kids then why not ban everything that possibly could be bad for kids?

swatcoder 3y ago
Most of those things have become subject to both government regulation and industry self-policing, and there’s continual debate over whether there needs to be more done and what shape it might take. Just getting to that point with social media will be a big win. The social media industry came on quick and got a free pass for a while, but it’s now more mature and needs to become more mindful of its social consequences just the same as other industries. Whether that needs to come through bans and regulation or can be achieved through voluntary self-restraint is up to the big players and their egos.
- 908087 3y ago
  [dead]
lnxg33k1 3y ago
Parents are not police, we as a society also need to define boundaries for what is bad, parents could also prevent their kids to go to work into mines when libertarians said that it was ok, but parents are not body guards, what if some parent is not fit and their kids take heroin? Is it ok for a kid to carry the effect of a life as toxic dependent because their parents couldn't police them well enough? If a kid is born with libertarians parents, should he suffer his whole life time just because hes born to retards? What I am saying is that why you and other corporativists think that its ok for kids to suffer if their parents aren’t able to show them a balanced way to live and approach tech?
codegeek 3y ago
I get your point. But we have to draw the line somewhere and Soda (even though addictive) is not something that has the same level of peer pressure and damage vector as Social Media. If all your 9 year old friends are on it, you bet you wanna be on it. I will also argue that things like Soda can harm you but are much easier to restrict compared to Social Media access and social media has compounding effects on your mind especially if you are a child.
autoexec 3y ago
By that logic I guess we shouldn't have rules against companies selling children food with ground up glass in it. If you can't trust parents to keep their kids from buying food with ground up glass in it, why not have the government ban everything that could be bad for kids right? Personally, I'm very much glad that the government doesn't allow companies to sell food to children with ground up glass in it no matter what individual parents do or don't allow and nothing about that ban on ground up glass in food means that we should also ban soda or candy. We can absolutely look at products and services that are actually harmful and deem them unacceptable for children without banning every other thing on the planet that might possibly be bad. Some states feel that Facebook has risen to the level where it's harmful enough to do something at the government level. I think that's probably what's needed since facebook has demonstrated that they're unwilling or unable to stop the harm they're causing without government intervention.

Yeah, but why not also ban candy, soda, junk food, video games ect? If we can't trust parents to parent their kids then why not ban everything that possibly could be bad for kids?

swatcoder 3y ago

Most of those things have become subject to both government regulation and industry self-policing, and there’s continual debate over whether there needs to be more done and what shape it might take. Just getting to that point with social media will be a big win. The social media industry came on quick and got a free pass for a while, but it’s now more mature and needs to become more mindful of its social consequences just the same as other industries. Whether that needs to come through bans and regulation or can be achieved through voluntary self-restraint is up to the big players and their egos.

908087 3y ago
[dead]

lnxg33k1 3y ago

Parents are not police, we as a society also need to define boundaries for what is bad, parents could also prevent their kids to go to work into mines when libertarians said that it was ok, but parents are not body guards, what if some parent is not fit and their kids take heroin? Is it ok for a kid to carry the effect of a life as toxic dependent because their parents couldn't police them well enough? If a kid is born with libertarians parents, should he suffer his whole life time just because hes born to retards? What I am saying is that why you and other corporativists think that its ok for kids to suffer if their parents aren’t able to show them a balanced way to live and approach tech?

codegeek 3y ago

I get your point. But we have to draw the line somewhere and Soda (even though addictive) is not something that has the same level of peer pressure and damage vector as Social Media. If all your 9 year old friends are on it, you bet you wanna be on it. I will also argue that things like Soda can harm you but are much easier to restrict compared to Social Media access and social media has compounding effects on your mind especially if you are a child.

autoexec 3y ago

By that logic I guess we shouldn't have rules against companies selling children food with ground up glass in it. If you can't trust parents to keep their kids from buying food with ground up glass in it, why not have the government ban everything that could be bad for kids right? Personally, I'm very much glad that the government doesn't allow companies to sell food to children with ground up glass in it no matter what individual parents do or don't allow and nothing about that ban on ground up glass in food means that we should also ban soda or candy. We can absolutely look at products and services that are actually harmful and deem them unacceptable for children without banning every other thing on the planet that might possibly be bad. Some states feel that Facebook has risen to the level where it's harmful enough to do something at the government level. I think that's probably what's needed since facebook has demonstrated that they're unwilling or unable to stop the harm they're causing without government intervention.