All right. Now, let’s talk about how that’s going to be enforced without de-anonymizing Internet discourse.
Probably by de-anonymizing internet discourse.
The whole point is de-anonymizing and directly censoring. Why would they protect children in any way? They’ll mostly die in wars in a few years anyway, fighting for the elites.
I don’t see European nations being the aggressor in the next 30 years to be honest.
Might be a bit optimistic, given Europe’s continuing slide into fascism.
Airstrip one has always been at war with Eurasia.
Depending on your bar for aggression, they already are. Migrants are explicitly left to die in the Mediterranean in the thousands while nation-scale resources are used to rescue one (1) billionaire submarine.
Most laws aimed at “protecting the children” are used as stepping stones toward fascism
I like to imagine this is what people also said when the age requirement for cigarettes was introduced
Even if they don’t do any age verification law (probably their main motivation though), it’s still good to officially make it illegal.
IMO it should come with tools for parents to enforce it.
the big corporate owned social media should be heavily regulated/banned not just for children, but for everyone
This should be the parents’ decision, not some pedo-fascists’ one.
Yeah, it’s not that easy with social media. If half the children in class use it, the pressure on the other half is immense. One more, one more. If no one uses it, it’s much easier to say no and not feel like a douchy parent.
It’s that easy. Stop overcontrolling people. It isn’t the government’s purpose.
Agreed, 11 year old girls should be free to smoke, drink and be on social media if their parents want them to be
It is nothing of your concern. 11 old girls have parents, local society, etc. People like you are too easily equalizing completely different things like cigarettes and social media to be trusted with such decisions.
Not sure if this is a sarcastic or real comment… 🤔
It was very much sarcasm. But yeah, there’s probably people who actually think this.
The social media is fairly monopoliesed, so atm it’s neither parents nor the gov controlling them, it’s a random megacorp.
So what you suggest is still overcontrolling them, just by another (unelected, for profit) party.
And even if one kid doesn’t use social media but the majority does, that kid will be an outsider their whole life lacking a big part of the experience that shaped the majority.
That said, I’m ofc very much pro (actual) anonymity on the internets bcs way too many bad undemocratic/anti-equality things can come out of it, especially in a time of giant walled internet gardens with huge power & even larger interests.
It shouldn’t really be the purpose of Big Tech either. It’s fairly difficult to define freedom if it takes the form of exploitation of human behavior for profit. Social media is little more than an addictive ad delivery system.
Yes, let people do anything they like with no repercussions. Complete anarchy is the only way because the state is always wrong.
Sure . Parents are well known for all the good decisions they always take…… before cigarettes and alcohol were forbidden to children, many had no problem giving it to kids.
Parents would need to get more support from the state:
- parenting classes (before and after having kids to stay on top of science)
- salary for having and raising well-behaved children
- free education
- free transport
Unfortunately, you can’t rely on people “doing the right thing”. If could, then laws wouldn’t be necessary. You’d never have to lock your door or fear for any violence or untoward behavior from fellow human beings.
Yes, parents are responsible and self-determination is important (it’s your child not that of the state), but people are flawed. They will make decisions against their own self-interest or against those that they love (or claim to) e.g not caring about climate change despite having children. Giving people enough rope to be free and too much to hang themselves is not an easy task.
This doesn’t that bad if they can implement the age verification with enough privacy.
They can’t
They can, it’s not that hard. It won’t be perfect, but you can’t get perfect with privacy breaking means either.
The question is wil they?
Sites would put warnings like you have to be X years old or have your parents consent to be here, kids would lie about it and parents that can’t be bothered with parenting would go and sue the site. It should be the other way around: “If we catch your shitling around here, we are suing the fuck out of you”.
