4 ms·

>but not in the sense that "putting time limits on kid media consumption" is quite the right way to go. Why not? Isn't this what sensible parents should be doi

>but not in the sense that "putting time limits on kid media consumption" is quite the right way to go. Why not? Isn't this what sensible parents should be doing? Supervising and regulating how much time their children spend online, playing videogames, watching TV, doing homework, being sedentary, eating junk food, etc? Especially in this age of parental controls and surveillance-ware on all digital devices, it's easier than ever to monitor what your kids are up to. Should entire societies grant the government unlimited power over online media, online speech, kids and families just because some dumb parents hand their kids a blank iPad and their credit card and let them sit around all day on it frying their brain? What about regulating just those parents instead for being that stupid? Truthfully, a lot of the people having kids are unfit to be parents. I do believe that targeted online advertising needs to be regulated ASAP. Ad-tech is a plague on society.

dathinab 2y ago
> Isn't this what sensible parents should be doing? yes _parents_, but we are speaking about state actions (which could require companies to give parents tools to help them handle this this (:1)) and that affects parents, and teachers, and what is tough, and how society in general treats such things, and which things get which age rating etc. We need to convince society that this dopamine cycles are similar bad as drugs, only forcing it down their throat is not going to end well and I was also focusing a lot in the comment on from which angle states approach that actions > targeted online advertising while that is a problem, it isn't the core problem here the core problem is dark patterns intentionally designed to make apps/sites maximally addictive even if we didn't had any ads at all many apps(and co) would likely still do that, so that they can e.g. sell more micro transaction (like think 0.2ct per short watched, small enough to seem nothing but if you doom scroll for two+ hours every day adds up (~120$/€ a year). Heck even without micro transactions it still does make "statistics look good" some it probably still would be applied quite often.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

dathinab 2y ago

> Isn't this what sensible parents should be doing? yes _parents_, but we are speaking about state actions (which could require companies to give parents tools to help them handle this this (:1)) and that affects parents, and teachers, and what is tough, and how society in general treats such things, and which things get which age rating etc. We need to convince society that this dopamine cycles are similar bad as drugs, only forcing it down their throat is not going to end well and I was also focusing a lot in the comment on from which angle states approach that actions > targeted online advertising while that is a problem, it isn't the core problem here the core problem is dark patterns intentionally designed to make apps/sites maximally addictive even if we didn't had any ads at all many apps(and co) would likely still do that, so that they can e.g. sell more micro transaction (like think 0.2ct per short watched, small enough to seem nothing but if you doom scroll for two+ hours every day adds up (~120$/€ a year). Heck even without micro transactions it still does make "statistics look good" some it probably still would be applied quite often.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]