3 ms·

Some 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

by slibhb 2y ago

Some 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 ago
Why gambling but not Facebook?
- slibhb 2y ago
  Among 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 ago
    I'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 ago
    Sports 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 ago
  Isn't gambling usually illegal for minors?
meiraleal 2y ago
We definitely do. Just enforcing the laws would do, as drugs and gambling is a good amount of social media ads revenue
lm28469 2y ago
> But we don't need the government to protect people from Facebook! Says who exactly ?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
afavour 2y ago
Why don’t we? Cigarettes are harmful to people, they get regulated. If Facebook is harmful, why not regulate it?
- slibhb 2y ago
  So you really not see a difference between _lung cancer_ and "my teenager is moody"? The evidence that Facebook harms people is extremely iffy.
  - afavour 2y ago
    Do you not see the difference between “my teenager is moody” and “depression”? Using minimizing language here helps no one. I agree that there should be more formal research into the effects of social media but as a parent I see concern about the effects of social media in conversation with other parents and teachers all the time. It is something we all witness in our own lives to some extent or another. “We should let this run rampant while we investigate it fully” and “we should block this while we investigate it fully” are both valid viewpoints. And if voters want the latter it only makes sense for the government to be responsive to that.
    - slibhb 2y ago
      It's very hard, maybe impossible, to answer the question of whether social media harms people. It's like asking if TV, video games, etc harm people. Maybe -- but I don't trust the studies and at any rate, these are things people should decide for themselves and their families.
  - BSDobelix 2y ago
    >The evidence that Facebook harms people is extremely iffy. Funny because internal documents at Facebook said exactly that about teenagers: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/16/facebook-files-internal-research-harms/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/16/faceboo... https://fairplayforkids.org/facebook-research-children/ https://fairplayforkids.org/facebook-research-children/ https://theconversation.com/states-sue-meta-for-knowingly-hurting-teens-with-facebook-and-instagram-here-are-the-harms-researchers-have-documented-168043 https://theconversation.com/states-sue-meta-for-knowingly-hu...
throw10920 2y ago
I would say that it depends on the exact details of regulation being discussed, not just the target. For instance, you could propose a regulation that says that any type of gambling with any wager, whether using real currency or fictional, for any age range, should be illegal. I think most people would consider that to be unreasonable. You could also propose a regulation that says that companies cannot collect personal data on individuals for advertising purposes unless that individual is directly engaged with that company as a customer. This would hopefully render illegal Facebook's "shadow profiles"[1] that collect data on non-customers. While more controversial, I'd say that this would still be supported by most people you'd meet, while still falling into the category of "the government protecting people from Facebook". Details of regulation matter, a lot. [1] https://www.howtogeek.com/768652/what-are-facebook-shadow-profiles-and-should-you-be-worried/ https://www.howtogeek.com/768652/what-are-facebook-shadow-pr...

by slibhb 2y ago

Some 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 ago

Why gambling but not Facebook?

slibhb 2y ago
Among 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 ago
  I'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 ago
  Sports 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 ago
Isn't gambling usually illegal for minors?

meiraleal 2y ago

We definitely do. Just enforcing the laws would do, as drugs and gambling is a good amount of social media ads revenue

lm28469 2y ago

> But we don't need the government to protect people from Facebook! Says who exactly ?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

afavour 2y ago

Why don’t we? Cigarettes are harmful to people, they get regulated. If Facebook is harmful, why not regulate it?

slibhb 2y ago
So you really not see a difference between _lung cancer_ and "my teenager is moody"? The evidence that Facebook harms people is extremely iffy.
- afavour 2y ago
  Do you not see the difference between “my teenager is moody” and “depression”? Using minimizing language here helps no one. I agree that there should be more formal research into the effects of social media but as a parent I see concern about the effects of social media in conversation with other parents and teachers all the time. It is something we all witness in our own lives to some extent or another. “We should let this run rampant while we investigate it fully” and “we should block this while we investigate it fully” are both valid viewpoints. And if voters want the latter it only makes sense for the government to be responsive to that.
  - slibhb 2y ago
    It's very hard, maybe impossible, to answer the question of whether social media harms people. It's like asking if TV, video games, etc harm people. Maybe -- but I don't trust the studies and at any rate, these are things people should decide for themselves and their families.
- BSDobelix 2y ago
  >The evidence that Facebook harms people is extremely iffy. Funny because internal documents at Facebook said exactly that about teenagers: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/16/facebook-files-internal-research-harms/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/16/faceboo... https://fairplayforkids.org/facebook-research-children/ https://fairplayforkids.org/facebook-research-children/ https://theconversation.com/states-sue-meta-for-knowingly-hurting-teens-with-facebook-and-instagram-here-are-the-harms-researchers-have-documented-168043 https://theconversation.com/states-sue-meta-for-knowingly-hu...

throw10920 2y ago

I would say that it depends on the exact details of regulation being discussed, not just the target. For instance, you could propose a regulation that says that any type of gambling with any wager, whether using real currency or fictional, for any age range, should be illegal. I think most people would consider that to be unreasonable. You could also propose a regulation that says that companies cannot collect personal data on individuals for advertising purposes unless that individual is directly engaged with that company as a customer. This would hopefully render illegal Facebook's "shadow profiles"[1] that collect data on non-customers. While more controversial, I'd say that this would still be supported by most people you'd meet, while still falling into the category of "the government protecting people from Facebook". Details of regulation matter, a lot. [1] https://www.howtogeek.com/768652/what-are-facebook-shadow-profiles-and-should-you-be-worried/ https://www.howtogeek.com/768652/what-are-facebook-shadow-pr...