16 ms·

If we taught systems thinking in schools things like internet age verification would never get past being an idea on the back of a napkin. People struggle to co

• ElProlactin 4mo ago
  > If we taught systems thinking in schools things like internet age verification would never get past being an idea on the back of a napkin. But why would we do that? If we taught people how to think, they wouldn't sit their toddlers down in front an iPad for 8+ hours a day to entertain (read: keep them occupied and quiet) them with YouTube videos, sign them up for a Facebook account before they could wipe their own butts, etc. The sad irony of this age verification thing is that if we had a decent society and parents with common sense, age verification wouldn't even be a topic.
  • dozerly 4mo ago
    Parents with common sense comes from teaching children common sense. You have to fix the child education issue first, a lot of adults are too far gone to educate at this point.
    • Synthetic7346 4mo ago
      How can you fix the child education problem without fixing the parent education? School is but a few hours a day, and kids spend more time with parents and learn from them. I was lucky that my parents liked to read and encouraged me to read, but my friends didn't have the same exposure that I did and never liked to read books.
      • pfannkuchen 4mo ago
        What? School is basically the same hours as a full time job. How is it but a few hours a day? Did you time travel from the 1800s?
        • samplifier 4mo ago
          Indeed, and then after school care because both parents are still working until 6 pm, quietly eat dinner, watch cocomelon, and then to bed. Horror.
  • johnny22 4mo ago
    I don't get why you would start there. Their parents probably didn't have youtube or ipads and they and/or their parents are the ones pushing it.
  • lyu07282 4mo ago
    Uhh imagine you know about countries other than the US that implement age verification. Like the UK, Brazil, Australia, France, Spain, Italy and dozens of other countries with vastly different educational systems. Then perhaps you could begin to understand the magnitude of your own ignorance of actual power and political ideology. Instead of embarrassingly trying to reason yourself a political education from first principle. Uh dumb law I don't like. Cause people dumb. If people not dumb, no dumb law. Uhh I am very smart. "Systems thinking" oh fucking hell stfu
• yamillove 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  • jrflowers 4mo ago
    That page says most kids can barely read. Are you a kid?
    • yamillove 4mo ago
      [dead]
    • stavros 4mo ago
      > Across student groups, average fourth-grade reading scores in 2022 were lower for the following student groups: > [..] > male and female students; So reading scores were lower for everyone? Why single out groups?
      • yamillove 4mo ago
        [dead]
• roenxi 4mo ago
  In fairness, the evidence is that people already pretty firmly against things like chat control and the will to push it through tends to come from the political circles more than popular belief it is a good idea. I expect that if the measure itself went to a general vote, the majority would be against it once they have to deal with a specific proposal. It takes repeated pushes by the authoritarians looking for an opportunity to get things like speech controls or privacy violations through and the politicians mysteriously give up trying to roll it back no matter what the public pressure might be. That being said, any expectation of thoughtfulness at all makes politics frustrating. Even basic things like why people keep making small random changes when most of these problems and solutions haven't changed in more than 2 millennia. And there is a pretty easy consensus to come to about what works. The repeated failures of authoritarianism to get to a good place are so consistent it is wild that people keep trying it.
  • chii 4mo ago
    Stupid things like brexit was put to a vote, but really important things such as age verification and mass surveillance are never put to any vote.
    • godwinson__4-8 4mo ago
      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QFgcqB8-AxE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QFgcqB8-AxE
    • shevy-java 4mo ago
      But Brexit was a vote, by the people. Yes, the pro-leave campaign lied to no ends, but people still made a choice on their own and the majority for leave was quite slim. This is very different to age sniffing here. Age sniffing is not being queried via public votum - lobbyists push it through without any resistance. It's amazing how this works.
      • graemep 4mo ago
        The pro-remain campaign lied too and I would argue a great deal more. Take a look at the predictions of the immediate effect of Brexit vote (for 1017-18) on page 9 of the Treasury report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a80772140f0b62305b8b510/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a80772140f0b... This whole argument is why we do not have more direct democracy. The people in power and people who benefit from the status quo do not want the hoi polloi taking the "wrong" decisions. We might end up nationalising things or taxing big business effectively or all sorts of terrible things. Better to just give people the illusion of choice by letting them choose between two "neo-liberal" parties.
• NoPicklez 4mo ago
  Well we teach people the health benefits of physical activity school but many don't continue with it.
  • onion2k 4mo ago
    Sorry, this is going to be a rant. :) Admittedly it's a long time since I was in school, but when I was there the notion of teaching the benefits of physical activity was limited to being told to run about for some 'sport', and absolutely nothing about why that's a good idea. Everyone was expected to do the same thing with no consideration for ability, disability, or motivation. Kids were punished with detentions for refusing to endure painful exercise that they couldn't do as well as their more capable peers. The very obvious second order effect of poor physical education is fat unmotivated adults who don't exercise. Maybe educators need some systems thinking training too.
    • philipbjorge 4mo ago
      It’s been 25 years since I was in school and this was my experience. Unsure if it’s changed…
    • CalRobert 4mo ago
      Ironically when I was in high school I was fat and hated pe but biked about 20 minutes to school every day. Now in middle age I still bike everywhere and am in better shape than most of my peers.. Turns out I just really really hate running.
      • HerbManic 4mo ago
        Same. In my mid 40's and probably in the top 20% of my age group. Absolutely hate running!
    • 5693802 4mo ago
      I'd add that not only were we not taught about health benefits in PE classes, the punishment for non-participation was not only detention but also potentially failing the entire grade. I ended up dropping out in my first year of high school due to a culmination of similar issues. I loved and still love learning, but my school was not an environment for learning. It was an environment for teaching rigid obedience to authority, and nothing more. My particular favorite thing to rant about is how, on the first day, I was held in detention for the entire day and made to skip the introduction to my classes because I unknowingly wore the wrong shade of blue for the dress code. Like the middle school in the same district, the dress code required a white, red, or blue polo (FUCK YEAH AMERICA!!!!), but the shade of blue from the middle school uniforms was not allowed, something I was never aware of but instead got arbitrarily punished for along with dozens of others, with my parent being made to buy a new set of uniform shirts after school. It is no wonder that the US is in a state of decline given how horrid the schooling is. I can't imagine a worse environment for stifling intellectual curiosity than the one I was in.
• microgpt 4mo ago
  Almost anything can be a slippery slope to almost anything. We'd never get anything done.
• bluegatty 4mo ago
  No, we have any number of social constructs around 'age and responsibility' - driving, alcohol, pubs, porn, excessive violence and so much more. It's bereft to suggest that we wouldn't nominally have those in the digital world. And, people are concerned about nth order effects, it's a huge point of debate. Yes - there is a huge slippery slope argument to be made, but it's an argument ... to be made. There are all sorts of ways of doing this.
  • dv_dt 4mo ago
    Social media age verification is like none of those - social media is the modern public square and age verification is asking everybody to show their papers before participating in free speech in the public. It will have a chilling effect on free speech and will be a tool for authoritarian control
    • Nursie 4mo ago
      Social media as it has become now is a shitshow where a minority of angry and/or disingenuous posters dominate discourse. Twitter (X) was never the public square, and now it's little more than a playground for propagandists. The rest of us do well to ignore it, and it seems that even the 'legacy' media are starting to realise the days of breathlessly reporting on tweet-storms weren't great for anyone.
      • hparadiz 4mo ago
        In a recent survey of under sixteen year olds in a place where an under sixteen social media ban exists asked how many of them used social media found that 80% were still using it. Do you actually need a login to consume social media? The answer to that is no. You can doom scroll all you want on sites like Reddit with no account whatsoever.
    • simondotau 4mo ago
      A poor analogy. The public square has never been properly anonymous. If you start saying things which contravene laws or the rights of others, the police have been able to capture you and unmask your identity, if concealed.
• stymaar 4mo ago
  “Age verification” isn't a problem in itself, the problem is how it's done. They could issue a physical id card with a cryptographic chip and do the age verification in a zero-knowledge fashion and it would be perfectly fine. The problem is the lack of thinking about the solution and just handwaving “age verification” as a political posture, which is why we end up with half-baked systems.
  • mdp2021 4mo ago
    > and it would be perfectly fine Unless a tiny chance exists that some system in the middle is not secure. Then you have the problem of those who orient their acceptance to the "oh well" shrug, and then systemic faults get downplayed by default. (Edit: I re-read and notice 'half-baked systems': seemingly, we agree.) > as a political posture Which is the core problem of masses accepting pseudo-heartly and not-brainy unacceptable figures. And again, systemic faults incarnated as administrations get downplayed by default.
  • MaKey 4mo ago
    This assumes good faith, which doesn't match reality. It's about control, not protecting children. Also age verification is still a problem in itself. Given your idea of a physical card, kids will find a way to use the card of their parents. Even if the card couldn't be misused by others - you give platforms the knowledge of whom is a minor, which means they can be targeted better.
    • stymaar 4mo ago
      > This assumes good faith, which doesn't match reality. It's about control, not protecting children. “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” > Given your idea of a physical card, kids will find a way to use the card of their parents. Sure there are kids who have access to their parents credit card with the PIN, but how frequent is that? In every system, fraud will exist, but that doesn't mean the system is worthless. “The optimal amount of fraud is non-zero”: https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fraud/ https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fra...
• miohtama 4mo ago
  Most people just want to blame someone else of their problems
• palata 4mo ago
  > If we taught systems thinking in schools things like internet age verification would never get past being an idea on the back of a napkin. What about climate change and the current mass extinction?
  • beezlewax 4mo ago
    Yes those might be slightly more iimportant.
• delusional 4mo ago
  I know systems thinking, and am in favor of a version of these types of legislation. Give me your best argument from systems thinking, and I'll give you a thoughtful reply.
  • jchanimal 4mo ago
    The only reasonable solution shape I've seen is the one that trusts the parents to set an operating system setting that says whether or not the user is allowed to access adult content. And so it doesn't actually verify age, it just verifies parental intent.
    • delusional 4mo ago
      I would not be opposed to that solution. If that's what we can get passed, I'd be happy. Personally, I'm more in favor of a version that integrates with a government issued digital id that attests a user can legally see the provided material. The publisher would have to implement the check, because my version also includes the technical capability to disregard the law. You then just have to be ready to be charged with a crime. I think the reason I prefer this is that my country almost already has the infrastructure for this system.
  • HerbManic 4mo ago
    The argument usually is that it is a slippery slope. Something that is introduced in the name of virtue ends up being co-opted into a system of control as those in power and peoples attitudes change with subsequent layers of normalization.
    • delusional 4mo ago
      Sure, maybe that's true. Who knows, maybe it will also actually just work and solve the problem. There's no argument there. The argument that touches on "those in power" must also contend with "those in power" just abusing that power anyway, no matter what legislation is passed. People in power are usually pretty crafty.
  • 4mo ago
• HerbManic 4mo ago
  And those that are keen to make some noise about it are labelled as being conspiracy minded or against the safety of children. It causes a situation where because of the potential backlash, even if they are right, few people will come to the defense for fear of being ostracized as well.
• rdiddly 4mo ago
  Journalists are supposed to be helping the people by doing it.
• hogehoge51 4mo ago
  If we taught systems thinking in any educational setting, and it took hold for a significant portion of the population, we would have already transcended into immortal thinking energy beings and age verification debates would be irrelevant....
• _pdp_ 4mo ago
  You can exploit both ways.
• frankie_t 4mo ago
  Do you (or anyone else) have a good resource for learning systems thinking? I might have some from working in SE and just observing the world, but I've never studied it
• basisword 4mo ago
  >> If we taught systems thinking in schools things like internet age verification would never get past being an idea on the back of a napkin. People struggle to consider the second-, third-, and nth-order effects of anything Does this not imply we also wouldn't get the internet because people would have considered the damage it would also cause?
• ben_w 4mo ago
  Having grown up through the early-ish days of the web, I'm still surprised the internet in general didn't get an 18+ age rating almost immediately. Though I suppose that may have something to do with households in the early days having at most one internet connected device even if they were well off, so society could get away with blaming parents for not monitoring kids' use.
  • vessenes 4mo ago
    Don’t underestimate the impact of AOL - the main experience boomers and greatest generation had of the early internet was moderated and mediated. My parents were not on IRC.
• Ouman 4mo ago
  A lot of bad tech policy seems to come from judging a proposal only by its stated intent
  • technol0gic 4mo ago
    carefully crafted stated intent
• thrance 4mo ago
  That's by design. Bringing up any kind of systemic issues, or applying a materialist reasoning to anything will get you taxed with communism. This is a classic strategy of the capital class, and is at the foundation of neoliberalism. In Thatcher's own words: > There is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. They have to keep the population blind to any kind of systemic thinking to rob them blind.
• romankolpak 4mo ago
  What’s the alternative? How do you solve the problem of not allowing children into online spaces where they shouldn’t be allowed in?
  • big85 4mo ago
    The existing paradigm is on-device parental controls. It's worked for the past 30 years, and the alternative is forcing everyone to show government ID to use websites.
  • philipallstar 4mo ago
    We should assign one or two adults to children who provide for them, and prevent various dangers, including online ones, from reaching them. It sounds like a lot of effort, but it is also the most important task on the planet.
    • harshreality 4mo ago
      A generation of kids have grown up with just such assigned adults, who overwhelmingly did not apply sufficient oversight to the kids' use of social media. In large part that's because, if they'd done so, the kids would've been socially isolated from their peers, at least the most normal ones with the most normal parents, which are the kinds of friends most other normal parents want their kids to have. It's a collective action problem, except instead of "I can be better off if I ignore what I know is best for society", it's "if I ignore what I know is best for my kids psychologically, they will still have friends, and social media brainrot is a lesser evil than socially isolating my kid from all the normal kids at school." And also, giving kids social media interaction devices is a convenient form of babysitting. It reduces up-front effort of parenting.
      • shhsjajaaj 4mo ago
        Hard disagree. It’s the “phone kids” with behavior issues and their parents are usually similar. It’s time to get serious about stupid people being stupid and not calling it “normal”.
      • 4mo ago
• TomasBM 4mo ago
  Unfortunately, I don't think systems thinking alone would help much. One could present the case in favor of Internet age verification to the nth-order effects, while downplaying the effects in the case against. So, in addition to presenting the cases with foreseeable effects, we need ways to compare the impact of worst-case scenarios in the two cases, and make a decision or compromise based on that.
  • intended 4mo ago
    Concur. Systems thinking is one thing. One sided systems thinking is another. If you disregard the challenges kids and their parents, or adults as a whole, are facing with just social media, you can easily make a case against age verification. Yet, the whole reason we are at this juncture, is because there are actual injuries being felt by people. Not because privacy isn’t valued or hasn’t been defended regularly.
• raxxorraxor 4mo ago
  No, not everyone exploits that. But those that reject these controls are often ridiculed because the thought about any side effect is too alien. Yet I don't think age verification will work with national IDs for that matter. I generally use social media sites that won't implement it. But yes, the normal insta/tiktok user will be affected and not think too much about it. Others will have true freedom of speech.
  • petcat 4mo ago
    > I generally use social media sites that won't implement it. Which social media sites won't implement it?
    • raxxorraxor 4mo ago
      Most of them are more insignificant than Twitter, Insta, TikTok. And while they do employ advertising here and there, profit is only interesting for keeping up with server costs.
• cdrini 4mo ago
  I think there are many arguments for and against this type of regulation. Good arguments on both sides take into account nth-order effects. But both sides have different priorities, and have different weighing of the trade-offs. Calling one side effectively "thick" isn't really taking part in the debate. (And cause and effect are taught pretty early on in school; not sure you need to learn "systems thinking" to understand nth-order effects.) What are the nth-order effects that you think are not being considered or weighted accordingly by proponents of this regulation?
  • eimrine 4mo ago
    There are no good arguments for this type of regulation, but there are some very good arguments to not let kids to use proprietary software. You know, nothing is worse than a half-truth.
  • asdf88990 4mo ago
    This is Whataboutism. Maybe the wolf has good reasons for leaving the stockyards gates open, it is a different perspective, yeah, but for the stock it is pretty clear good vs death. Now of course, no one is going to “directly” dir from these laws but so much meaning that comes with freedom will be lost, but maybe the wolfs see it under a different light.
  • rTX5CMRXIfFG 4mo ago
    Violation of rights to privacy — age verification ties an identity to the request, so if you’re surfing porn or browsing controversial threads, you could be flagged by law enforcement or the other third parties that the state might be sharing data with, such as insurance companies that might infer the wrong things about you. You could be blackmailed, too. And then there’s also the leakage of those data points to rival nation states, in case of a security breach. Plenty of bad nth order effects if you just think about it
    • thinkingtoilet 4mo ago
      What right to privacy do you have online? For the record, I am fully against this but people just throw the word "right" around. In another thread here people had a "right" to Anthropic's latest model. It almost becomes a joke. You have a right not to use the internet, but if you do the government can make laws, however shitty, if they want to. Relying on "rights" as an argument fails quickly in my opinion. You have a right to buy a gun, but a lot of places require verification. You have the right to be alcohol or porn, but that requires age verification. What right do you have to go online without providing verification? If you can't provide a legal basis, come up with a better argument because yours is easily dismissed.
• vortegne 4mo ago
  Classic STEM guy thinking that STEM is the cure for everything
• soulofmischief 4mo ago
  In other words, without a solid, fundamental, national level of education, democracy just will not work. And any democratic institution which does not codify the right to education in very specific terms is inherently weak to degradation over time due to subverted interests in the ruling class. How do we solve this problem? I wish I readily had an answer. But as we witness our democratic institutions crumble in real time, it's hard to imagine the average voter becoming more educated in our lifetime.
• biophysboy 4mo ago
  Give me a break - tech is not remotely interested in comprehensive “systems” thinking about the problems that motivated these age verification policies
• ccppurcell 4mo ago
  I agree with your broader point but I'm always skeptical of the claim "we should teach xyz in schools!" Because, well, choose your least favourite subject at school. A language, history or geography, mathematics perhaps. How much do you remember? The reason you don't remember is because you weren't motivated to learn, since you didn't, at the time, think it worth learning. If you think kids are champing at the bit to learn systems thinking, or how to file taxes, or law or anything else really then you are unfortunately wrong.
  • rTX5CMRXIfFG 4mo ago
    And I agree with the commenter’s well-meaning, but we are technically teaching systems theory already in schools. If you’ve had classes in any of the natural sciences, you’ve had systems thinking. If you don’t remember a whit, well then, proves your point—it’s probably not that great of an idea afterall.
    • cosmic_cheese 4mo ago
      The question however is if students are ever challenged or encouraged to apply their learnings beyond the classroom and in daily life. In my experience, the answer is usually “no”.
  • cosmic_cheese 4mo ago
    To me classes being boring and forgettable has more to do with the method of teaching than the subject. Just about anything can be made interesting with the right approach, and often that approach isn’t the typical textbooks, tests, and rote memorization. Perhaps I’m biased, though. I learn best when provided with working practical examples and hands-on exercises that allow me to develop my own internal models. They can make a concept “click” where I’d be beating my head against a wall with traditional methods for a much longer period of time to achieve the same revelation.
• caseysoftware 4mo ago
  > "If we taught systems thinking in schools" In the US, the public school system can barely teach basic reading and math. And the teachers don't appear to understand 2nd or 3rd order thinking themselves so therefore are unlikely to be able to teach it. Teaching systems thinking may be an effective solution but it needs an effective delivery system to test it.
  • criddell 4mo ago
    Have you talked to any high school students or teachers lately? The ones I have (via my kids) are all articulate, thoughtful, and kind. It gives me a lot of hope for the future.
    • hattmall 4mo ago
      I mean, not surprisingly, this is entirely geographic and system dependent. Do your high school teachers (or elementary) have to wear body cameras, practice administering narcan, and how to clear the chamber of a discovered gun, or do they get to 3D print parts for their classroom and go on field trips?
      • criddell 4mo ago
        It's the outliers that are geographic and system dependent. Rank the schools and exclude outliers at both extremes. The remaining schools aren't filled with teachers acting like prison guards watching over illiterate students.
    • caseysoftware 4mo ago
      What's the average look like? Are you speaking of Austin proper or Round Rock, West Lake, Cedar Park, or similar?
  • forlorn_mammoth 4mo ago
    Alas, the teachers are typically pretty hampered by policies they cannot control. They are not the thing to blame. It's system thinking all the way down.
• chrisweekly 4mo ago
  I've long held that Logic should be a part of the core high school curriculum. Understanding basic if/then propositions and a handful of axioms form a robust foundation for reasoning in any domain.
• dzonga 4mo ago
  have you considered that maybe the "elites/beneficiaries of such laws" - would find it disadvantageous to teach systems thinking to the unwashed masses. an example look at how slavery is taught in the southern united states. most people that learn systems thinking is coz life forces them to.
• pasquinelli 4mo ago
  it's not that they're bad at logic in general, it's that the "protecting the children" part gets them emotionally reactive, which bypasses logic. same thing happens when you tell a man who's emotionally reactive about his masculinity that soy will give him tits, just those words are enough to shut down his thinking. people are plenty good at systems thinking. if we made them better at it, their emotional immaturity would still bypass it.
• order-matters 4mo ago
  most people simply dont care to control for higher order effects. they enjoy doing things on principle and then dealing with the effects seperately. the principle of protecting children is strong. the solution of verification, no matter how poorly implemented, cannot be struck down while people are interested in persuing the principle it claims to represent. the only other way around it is to come up with another solution that supports the principle and hope it gains more traction. but when the powers at be putting forth the verification may have ulterior motives to begin with, alternative solutions have a way of losing traction
• jmyeet 4mo ago
  Look, this is just a baseless opinion because we restrict things from various groups all the time. Gambling, tobacco, alcohol, drugs, firearms, pornography, voting, driver’s licenses, classified material, the list goes on. Yet people will employ lazy slappery slope fallacies for this one issue in particular.
• afiori 4mo ago
  Well people that have been hearing of the slippery slope fallacy their whole life might end up biased against such an approach
• abustamam 4mo ago
  This is an excellent point. I'm self educated while my wife holds multiple degrees and a masters. Yet when she saw a news article about age verification (something I've been following for years thanks to HN) she was like "this is good" and I'm like "why" and the ensuing discussion made it clear that she didn't really think about the repercussions of age verification, just that seemingly smart people in positions of power seemed to think it was a good idea. And I think this is dangerous. We have smart people like my wife who would probably vote Yes on this if it came to our ballot, because the smart people who wrote the measure were able to control the narrative. Not that I'm so smart, mind you. I just follow HN and EFF so I'm exposed to this kind of stuff. I'd probably be blind to such things outside of the tech world. I'd love to say that I'd think of nth order effects when at the ballot but honestly maybe I won't.
• wartywhoa23 4mo ago
  > If we taught systems thinking in schools ... This plus methods of narrative steering and psychological manipulation in general. Though I can't see this happenning while the transnational cartel is still at the helm.
• 7e 4mo ago
  Nth order effects are unpredictable. You can only observe them after the fact. Systems thinking is a debugging methodology, not at all a crystal ball.
• 7e 4mo ago
  Nth order effects are unpredictable. You can only observe them after the fact. Systems thinking is a debugging methodology, not at all a crystal ball. Witness: your comment makes a bunch of predictions that are very unlikely to be true.
• hellojesus 4mo ago
  I was asking the Google llm search about why iterative games don't reach their competitive equilibrium the round after revealing the theory. In my example, it was the "guess 2/3 the average game", and I asked it why my class didn't immediately converge to zero after it was explained. The llm said people are lazy and I have autism because I couldn't identify or understand the stopping criteria used by my classmates. I'm still confused.
  • Matumio 4mo ago
    How people play those games has to do with cultural norms and expectations, not just mathematics and logic. Same for age verification.
    • hellojesus 4mo ago
      But shouldn't the extension of logic be the same in either case, even if there is some premature convergence criteria? I have yet to see someone say age verification is okay because the gov ensure X is the maximum use of the tech. If anything, Public Choice Theory compels the grant that the gov will misuse the data given enough time.
      • Matumio 4mo ago
        Hm, if I query the LLM it tells me about cognitive hierarchy theory, and the Keynesian beauty contest. But my point is, humans are not perfectly rational beings, and sometimes for a reason. (Like assuming that there is more uncertainty than the stated rules imply. Or altruistic behaviour that benefits the group as a whole. And we also have a default to imitate each other, see Joseph Henrich's 2016 Book.) Some of those defaults are culturally learned and leak into pure mathematical games (see e.g. the ultimatum game).
• thegrim33 4mo ago
  Devil's advocate - what's the nth-order effect of the current internet / social media setup that we currently have? How much damage is it causing? Who did the analysis on that and decided what ended up with today is the best setup?