3 ms·

So if it were a genuine approach from an adult simply looking to protect children, what would it be? As I said at the beginning, I don’t think it’s a good solut

by kulahan 4mo ago

So if it were a genuine approach from an adult simply looking to protect children, what would it be? As I said at the beginning, I don’t think it’s a good solution, just the only one we have. Again, please incorporate the fact that children are, for the first time EVER, dumber than their predecessor generation. It is a literally unprecedented step backwards. Who cares if kids can access data about slave revolts if they’re simply too stupid and pacified to do anything with the knowledge? Do you think people who spend all day hearing from their “totally-not-LLM” peers online that everything is scary, they are OWED an easier life, and that the true problems are things like social issues - ignore the climate and starving children, will be the ones to rise up and fix a problem?

999900000999 4mo ago
The government could start by undoing cuts to food aid programs. https://frac.org/hunger-poverty-america https://frac.org/hunger-poverty-america >Children: 14.1 million children lived in households that experienced food insecurity, a slight increase from the 13.8 million children reported in 2023. This is something the government can actually fix without eliminating the first amendment. Rampant food insecurity in young people probably has more to do with declining test scores than social media.
- kulahan 4mo ago
  Unfortunately, this is incorrect. There has not been significantly increasing food insecurity since ~2004. This food aid problem was created incredibly recently, and is unlikely to have anything to do with the topic at hand at all. Please, try to stay on topic. I doubt you honestly thought that was the issue.
  - 999900000999 4mo ago
    If you want my ultimate opinion on if the government should highly regulate the Internet with forced ID requirements, my answer is no regardless of the justification. Because then you need to ban VPNs to stop users from bypassing ID verification. My point is the government should fix issues within it's power to solve. Food insecurity is solvable, and kids who know where they're next meal is coming from will be nicer people. Online and off.

by kulahan 4mo ago

999900000999 4mo ago

The government could start by undoing cuts to food aid programs. https://frac.org/hunger-poverty-america https://frac.org/hunger-poverty-america >Children: 14.1 million children lived in households that experienced food insecurity, a slight increase from the 13.8 million children reported in 2023. This is something the government can actually fix without eliminating the first amendment. Rampant food insecurity in young people probably has more to do with declining test scores than social media.

kulahan 4mo ago
Unfortunately, this is incorrect. There has not been significantly increasing food insecurity since ~2004. This food aid problem was created incredibly recently, and is unlikely to have anything to do with the topic at hand at all. Please, try to stay on topic. I doubt you honestly thought that was the issue.
- 999900000999 4mo ago
  If you want my ultimate opinion on if the government should highly regulate the Internet with forced ID requirements, my answer is no regardless of the justification. Because then you need to ban VPNs to stop users from bypassing ID verification. My point is the government should fix issues within it's power to solve. Food insecurity is solvable, and kids who know where they're next meal is coming from will be nicer people. Online and off.