9 ms·

Oh won't somebody please think of the children?!

by behringer 1y ago

AlecSchueler 1y ago
So do we just trot out the same tired lines every time and never think of the social fallout of our actions?
- scotty79 1y ago
  We kinda do that blaming every new media for particular teens suicide. Some teens are suicidal. They always have been. When you are a teen your brain undergoes traumatic transformation. Not everyone gets to the other side safely. Same as with many other transformations and diseases. Yet every time new medium is found adjacent to some particular suicide we repeat the same tired line that creator of this medium should be to blame and should be punished and banned. And we are doing that while happily ignoring how existence of things like Facebook or Instagram provably degraded mental health and raised suicidality of entire generations of teenagers. However they mostly get a pass because we can't point a finger convincingly enough for any specific case and say it was anything more than just interacting with peers.
  - AlecSchueler 1y ago
    Except loads of us are talking about the dangers of social media and have been for the past ten years only to receive exactly the same hand waving and sarcastic responses as you see in this thread. Now the ultimate gaslighting of "the discussion didn't even happen."
    - scotty79 1y ago
      Was Facebook sued for teen suicide? Did it lose or at least settled? Facebook is not the same as ai chat. Facebook influence on mental health is negative and visible in research. The jury is still out on AI but it might as well turn out it has huge net positive effect on well being.
      - AlecSchueler 1y ago
        Net negative or net positive doesn't really matter. If there are aspects of it that are causing children to kill themselves then we should be able to discuss that without people rolling their eyes and saying "yeah yeah think of the children." We can have the benefits while also trying to limit the harms.
- mothballed 1y ago
  Of course not, we sue the shit out of the richest guy we can find in the chain of events, give most of it to our lawyer, then go on to ignore the weakening of the family unit and all the other deep-seated challenges kids face growing up and instead focus superficially on chatbots which at best are the spec on the tip of the iceberg.
  - fireflash38 1y ago
    Classic. Blame the family. Diffuse responsibility. Same exact shit with social media: it's not our fault we made this thing to be as addictive as possible. It's your fault for using it. It's your moral failing, not ours.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - behringer 1y ago
      It's not addictive, it's useful. By letting the government decide what we can do with it, you're neutering it and giving big business a huge advantage as they can run their own AI and don't require censoring it.
      - fireflash38 1y ago
        And if we didn't have these pesky regulations, we could have our burning rivers back! Those bastards took away our perfect asbestos too. The children yearn for the coal mines. Businesses can, will, and have hurt people and trampled people's rights in the pursuit of money.
        behringer 1y ago
        The government won't be regulating business usage though that my entire point.
      - AlecSchueler 1y ago
        These things are addictive though. They're often literally engineered to maximise engagement, and the money that goes into that completely dwarfs the power of schools and parents.

Oh won't somebody please think of the children?!

AlecSchueler 1y ago

So do we just trot out the same tired lines every time and never think of the social fallout of our actions?

scotty79 1y ago
We kinda do that blaming every new media for particular teens suicide. Some teens are suicidal. They always have been. When you are a teen your brain undergoes traumatic transformation. Not everyone gets to the other side safely. Same as with many other transformations and diseases. Yet every time new medium is found adjacent to some particular suicide we repeat the same tired line that creator of this medium should be to blame and should be punished and banned. And we are doing that while happily ignoring how existence of things like Facebook or Instagram provably degraded mental health and raised suicidality of entire generations of teenagers. However they mostly get a pass because we can't point a finger convincingly enough for any specific case and say it was anything more than just interacting with peers.
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  Except loads of us are talking about the dangers of social media and have been for the past ten years only to receive exactly the same hand waving and sarcastic responses as you see in this thread. Now the ultimate gaslighting of "the discussion didn't even happen."
  - scotty79 1y ago
    Was Facebook sued for teen suicide? Did it lose or at least settled? Facebook is not the same as ai chat. Facebook influence on mental health is negative and visible in research. The jury is still out on AI but it might as well turn out it has huge net positive effect on well being.
    - AlecSchueler 1y ago
      Net negative or net positive doesn't really matter. If there are aspects of it that are causing children to kill themselves then we should be able to discuss that without people rolling their eyes and saying "yeah yeah think of the children." We can have the benefits while also trying to limit the harms.
mothballed 1y ago
Of course not, we sue the shit out of the richest guy we can find in the chain of events, give most of it to our lawyer, then go on to ignore the weakening of the family unit and all the other deep-seated challenges kids face growing up and instead focus superficially on chatbots which at best are the spec on the tip of the iceberg.
- fireflash38 1y ago
  Classic. Blame the family. Diffuse responsibility. Same exact shit with social media: it's not our fault we made this thing to be as addictive as possible. It's your fault for using it. It's your moral failing, not ours.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - behringer 1y ago
    It's not addictive, it's useful. By letting the government decide what we can do with it, you're neutering it and giving big business a huge advantage as they can run their own AI and don't require censoring it.
    - fireflash38 1y ago
      And if we didn't have these pesky regulations, we could have our burning rivers back! Those bastards took away our perfect asbestos too. The children yearn for the coal mines. Businesses can, will, and have hurt people and trampled people's rights in the pursuit of money.
      - behringer 1y ago
        The government won't be regulating business usage though that my entire point.
    - AlecSchueler 1y ago
      These things are addictive though. They're often literally engineered to maximise engagement, and the money that goes into that completely dwarfs the power of schools and parents.