So once you are of the age you can concealed carry a firearm you are also fit to watch TikTok? Those seem equal... /s
Good point. Probably best to ban TikTok unless you have alcohol in your system.
Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
31–40 of 180 posts
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#32>The bill would eliminate minors’ access to any algorithmically generated navigation aids, such as “top content” and “hot items” lists. It would also eliminate home pages that are algorithmically organized, whether personalized to individual users or not, which would be replaced by a list of items presented chronologically (presumably in reverse chronological order if allowed because chronological order prioritizes t…
If it's legally mandated and services don't pull out of the market - yea usually it benefits us all since we can hop on the train (sometimes requiring a VPN but generally being offered as a feature for sale.
I, too, would love to switch over to such a mode on several social services.
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#33Two things are true:
1. this bill is trash, it couldn’t be enforced, it’s pandering.
2. Social media as it has existed for the last 5-10 years is harmful for teenagers.
Instagram is making teens depressed and suicidal. TikTok videos have people celebrating mental illness like Tourette’s and has brainwashed impressionable kids into believing they too have tics or multiple personalities or Tourette’s.
Something needs to be done. Not every corporate evolution is good or must be accepted as permanent. That’s corporate propaganda. Instagram needs a “taking the cocaine out of the recipe” moment if it’s going to survive as a reputable product.
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
In that case, they are free to take responsibility for the media their children have access to.
Good luck. My uncles kid was always on dating sites etc at a young age. I did everything for them setting up restrictions, ensuring the kid had an account that only could access a few sites. They took away their tablet and phone etc. The kid still managed to get caught hooking up with older men via Grindr.
Maybe teach the child how to think about their decisions in a responsible manner instead of trying to hide the world from them? You won’t win and the child won’t know why you’re hiding it from them. If they knew why, you wouldn’t need to hide it because they’d understand what to avoid on their own.
I was certainly on Grindr before I was 18 because I was a curious child and was never exposed to queer people. I was thankfully raised by parents that also taught me why making decisions like hooking up with old men could be bad. So I never did that.
My parents banned the internet from me as a kid -until i was 18- except in controlled manners. I flashed Linux on a school computer, used it to make a bootable VM of android that I could use to run apps on my person computer. I was particularly technically literate but there’s endless ways to avoid your parents wishes.
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny thing is that I guarantee a lot of the parents in support of dumb shit like this lose their minds at sexual education classes in public schools. Just shows that most people don't have the IQ necessary to be competent parents.
Which do you prefer? 1) We should have school districts teaching _Republican_ ideals because the local schools support it. 2) We should have school districts teaching _Democrat_ ideals because the local schools support it. 3) No to both 1 and 2. You simply can't have it both ways, therefore the reasonable option is to say no to both.
good luck teaching much beyond colors and shapes without overlapping with some "Republican ideals" or "Democrat ideals". especially given the ever-widening scope of what so many Republicans claim constitutes Democratic political indoctrination in schools.
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#36>The bill would eliminate minors’ access to any algorithmically generated navigation aids, such as “top content” and “hot items” lists. It would also eliminate home pages that are algorithmically organized, whether personalized to individual users or not, which would be replaced by a list of items presented chronologically (presumably in reverse chronological order if allowed because chronological order prioritizes t…
Yes. The description sounds heavily biased. I know lots of people want to see Facebook content chronologically ordered.
People also want this so others can see their posts, not just posts from popular posters.
Facebook seems to have this option, but I can’t get it to work. So I uninstalled it again.
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny thing is that I guarantee a lot of the parents in support of dumb shit like this lose their minds at sexual education classes in public schools. Just shows that most people don't have the IQ necessary to be competent parents.
Which do you prefer? 1) We should have school districts teaching _Republican_ ideals because the local schools support it. 2) We should have school districts teaching _Democrat_ ideals because the local schools support it. 3) No to both 1 and 2. You simply can't have it both ways, therefore the reasonable option is to say no to both.
If 3, what are schools teaching? Hopefully students learn something beyond the reality that their education is a political pawn.
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#38This would effectively ban minors from the Internet. And many walled gardens. EDIT: There’s a case to be made for it! The Internet, especially social media, is as powerful as illicit drugs and probably impacts development. But IMHO, this should be up to parents to decide, and I think the lawmakers probably have no clue the extent of this kind of rule would be.
It's a little ironic to argue the utility of banning something by comparing it to another thing which is already entirely prohibited but completely widespread throughout all of society anyway.
Isn’t that how banning things people want tends to go?
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#39This is probably for the best. I’m fine saying “think of the children” when you’re talking about … children. There’s really bad stuff out there. Think of the children.
A 16 year old can, in most cases, be legally independent of their parents: living on their own. They can also, in many states (and countries), legally give consent for sex. But we shouldn't let them view user generated content? Seems inconsistent at best.
The inconsistencies don't even end at adolescence. You can die for your country at 18, but you can't buy a drink or (since 2020) a smoke until you're 21.
Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services
#40Anyone voting for this is clearly not fit to hold their position. Aside from the stupidity of thinking this is enforceable, it's hamfisted and misguided. When they propose such open-ended legislation there should be an ability for an outside party to make every single one of them fill out a survey of "Would this be allowed/disallowed under the new law?" with a bunch of examples. If the people who voted for it don't h…
Yet here I am deliberately avoiding the features that Minnesota wants to ban. There is nothing hamfisted and misguided about this, the point is simply to ban the social media equivalent of casinos where the entire point of certain features is to stop you leaving by distracting you from the rest of your life.