6 ms·
Governments should not be in the business of telling tech companies how to design software. Honest observers will look back on the anti-social-media movement a
by slibhb 2y ago
Governments should not be in the business of telling tech companies how to design software.
Honest observers will look back on the anti-social-media movement as a moral panic. It isn't so much that social media is good, it's that the proper attitude toward new, scary things is to integrate them into your life in a healthy way rather than banning them.
And if we should ban anything it's drugs and gambling, not tiktok
- lm28469 2y ago> it's that the proper attitude toward new, scary things is to integrate them into your life in a healthy way rather than banning them Exactly, just like we did with DDT, leaded paint, leaded gas, freon in fridges, uranium in lipsticks, PFAS, food additives, &c. > Governments should not be in the business of telling tech companies how to design software. And tech companies should't be in the business of influencing who will govern you
- lukan 2y ago"And tech companies should't be in the business of influencing who will govern you" Who should be?
- LightHugger 2y agoJust like how we look at the anti tobacco movement as a moral panic? I think not.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- afavour 2y ago> And if we should ban anything it's drugs and gambling, not tiktok You realise children can legally do neither, right? Government should be in the business of improving citizens lives. As another commenter said, left to their own devices companies would still be using leaded paint everywhere if it was 1c cheaper per gallon. I’ve grown very tired of this “any regulation is bad regulation” viewpoint, it doesn’t hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.
- slibhb 2y agoSome regulations are good. Like the ones regulating drugs and gambling (that have been largely dismantled). But we don't need the government to protect people from Facebook!
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y agoWhy gambling but not Facebook?
- slibhb 2y agoAmong other things, there is solid evidence that the move toward gambling in the US has been a disaster. This is a topic that's fairly easy to study in objective terms. The evidence for social media harming people is highly disputed and, I would say, largely unconvincing. For one thing, it relies on self-reported subjective well-being.
- blargey 2y agoI'm not sure how you define "harm", but I think a reduction in "self-reported subjective well-being" is one of the more robust definitions.
- Der_Einzige 2y agoSports gambling is nothing compared to Dave and busters or Chuck E. Cheese’s tickets. We hook our kids of disgusting gambling behavior (legally?). No one cares about this and wants to go after sports betters instead. God damn boot lickers all over this thread. I’m so glad to not live anywhere near that godforsaken island.
- zknow 2y agoIsn't gambling usually illegal for minors?
- meiraleal 2y agoWe definitely do. Just enforcing the laws would do, as drugs and gambling is a good amount of social media ads revenue
- nozzlegear 2y ago> Governments should not be in the business of telling tech companies how to design software. This sounds a lot like "Governments should not be in the business of telling tobacco companies how to design cigarettes." Social media use is a problem for developing brains. I'm not saying I like Australia's plan, but, like the person you're replying to, I like the spirit of it.
- whimsicalism 2y agoTobacco use is problematic because it causes cancer. I don’t think the analogy is apt.
- nozzlegear 2y agoIsn't it more problematic because the nicotine causes addiction, making tobacco users orders of magnitude more likely to develop cancer? Social media sites are designed to cause addiction, to keep people doom scrolling and looking for their next dopamine hit for as long as possible. But even if addiction isn't our main contention and we want to keep the comparison to ailments, social media is also responsible for mental illnesses like depression, anxiety, eating disorders, etc. in developing children.
- whimsicalism 2y agocoffee is addictive but doesn’t cause cancer so we are more chill with it. the addiction is necessary but insufficient.
- rightbyte 2y ago> Honest observers will look back on the anti-social-media movement as a moral panic. It is a justified 'moral panic'. The social media companies have way too much power over peoples' conception of reality.
- bgun 2y agoYou realize that video slots, financial software, HR software, legal software, educational software and MANY more all have some amount of regulatory compliance, right? Do you think social media is special somehow and should just get a free pass when aspects of it have been shown to be potentially dangerous?
- whimsicalism 2y agoI do. Social media is how we communicate with each other - governments should tread extremely carefully. It is not governments job to ensure that certain viewpoints are not expressed or that people stay ideologically influenced by the views of other people.