4 ms·

> parents could decide whether or not to use a browser that enforced those restrictions You have to break the network effect as a community. This is why rich c

> parents could decide whether or not to use a browser that enforced those restrictions You have to break the network effect as a community. This is why rich communities are successfully deploying cell-phone bans in schools while poorer students don’t have that option. > Its about the government restricting anonymity and free expression It’s the government restricting ad-fueled rage and propaganda machines. Your suggestion for pervasive 18+ tagging is far more intrusive. Where I agree with the general sentiment is in that these restrictions should be on the social media giants. If a child is on X, X gets fined. But at the end of the day, the people calling their electeds and mobilizing in primaries want any ban.

idiotsecant 5mo ago
>You have to break the network effect as a community. This is why rich communities are successfully deploying cell-phone bans in schools while poorer students don’t have that option. Huh? Is your position that poor kids are being somehow oppressed by...not having phones banned? I am honestly baffled what point you're making here. > the government restricting ad-fueled rage and propaganda machines. Your suggestion for pervasive 18+ tagging is far more intrusive. In what world is putting the onus on content providers to self-label content intrusive? It's literally an html tag set and it's a existed for decades without offense so far. It doesn't even require government interaction at all - if it's unrated the browser doesn't load it. I'm tired of parents pearl clutching away my civil liberties so that they don't have to parent. You made the decision to have kids, not me. Take responsibility for it. The entire world doesn't need to bend to make the lives of parents slightly more convenient.
- HelloUsername 5mo ago
  > You made the decision to have kids, not me. The entire world doesn't need to bend to make the lives of parents slightly more convenient. I'm curious, how does Ohio restricting children's use of social media affect you specifically?
  - ipaddr 5mo ago
    Forced age verification for anyone in Ohio using social media and soon nationwide then worldwide.
    - JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
      > Forced age verification for anyone in Ohio using social media and soon nationwide then worldwide Utah has all sorts of stupid laws. I don’t live in Utah. I don’t care about them. The people in Utah can choose how to live. Their way of living doesn’t threaten my own.
    - JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
      > Forced age verification for anyone in Ohio using social media and soon nationwide then worldwide Utah has all sorts of stupid laws. I don’t live in Utah. I don’t care about them. The people in Utah can choose how to live. Their way of living doesn’t threaten my own. (Until they start nationally agitating, which is separate. Ohio isn’t doing that.)
- JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
  > poor kids are being somehow oppressed by...not having phones banned? I never used the word oppressed. Poor kids are stunted by device exposure compared to rich kids. The iPad-kid effect is a depressingly-consistent class indicator in kids under ~10. > In what world is putting the onus on content providers to self-label content intrusive? It regulates all speech. Every content provider has to tag their content in that system. I’m just calling for social media companies to be regulated. > doesn't even require government interaction at all - if it's unrated the browser doesn't load it Obviously doesn’t work in practice given the massive collective-action requirement with no penalty for lying and no incentive for participating. > tired of parents pearl clutching away my civil liberties You think social media companies don’t know how old you are? This political will is being stupidly expressed in many jurisdictions, granted. Pushing age verification to the OS is overkill. But parents are calling their electeds. Civil-rights groups, to my knowledge, have been able to muster no similar civil response. So the bans will come into play however they may, and then hopefully they can be amended down the road. Given the political nihilism running rampant in tech circles, I’m grumpily okay with this.

idiotsecant 5mo ago

>You have to break the network effect as a community. This is why rich communities are successfully deploying cell-phone bans in schools while poorer students don’t have that option. Huh? Is your position that poor kids are being somehow oppressed by...not having phones banned? I am honestly baffled what point you're making here. > the government restricting ad-fueled rage and propaganda machines. Your suggestion for pervasive 18+ tagging is far more intrusive. In what world is putting the onus on content providers to self-label content intrusive? It's literally an html tag set and it's a existed for decades without offense so far. It doesn't even require government interaction at all - if it's unrated the browser doesn't load it. I'm tired of parents pearl clutching away my civil liberties so that they don't have to parent. You made the decision to have kids, not me. Take responsibility for it. The entire world doesn't need to bend to make the lives of parents slightly more convenient.

HelloUsername 5mo ago
> You made the decision to have kids, not me. The entire world doesn't need to bend to make the lives of parents slightly more convenient. I'm curious, how does Ohio restricting children's use of social media affect you specifically?
- ipaddr 5mo ago
  Forced age verification for anyone in Ohio using social media and soon nationwide then worldwide.
  - JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
    > Forced age verification for anyone in Ohio using social media and soon nationwide then worldwide Utah has all sorts of stupid laws. I don’t live in Utah. I don’t care about them. The people in Utah can choose how to live. Their way of living doesn’t threaten my own.
  - JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
    > Forced age verification for anyone in Ohio using social media and soon nationwide then worldwide Utah has all sorts of stupid laws. I don’t live in Utah. I don’t care about them. The people in Utah can choose how to live. Their way of living doesn’t threaten my own. (Until they start nationally agitating, which is separate. Ohio isn’t doing that.)
JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
> poor kids are being somehow oppressed by...not having phones banned? I never used the word oppressed. Poor kids are stunted by device exposure compared to rich kids. The iPad-kid effect is a depressingly-consistent class indicator in kids under ~10. > In what world is putting the onus on content providers to self-label content intrusive? It regulates all speech. Every content provider has to tag their content in that system. I’m just calling for social media companies to be regulated. > doesn't even require government interaction at all - if it's unrated the browser doesn't load it Obviously doesn’t work in practice given the massive collective-action requirement with no penalty for lying and no incentive for participating. > tired of parents pearl clutching away my civil liberties You think social media companies don’t know how old you are? This political will is being stupidly expressed in many jurisdictions, granted. Pushing age verification to the OS is overkill. But parents are calling their electeds. Civil-rights groups, to my knowledge, have been able to muster no similar civil response. So the bans will come into play however they may, and then hopefully they can be amended down the road. Given the political nihilism running rampant in tech circles, I’m grumpily okay with this.