121–130 of 180 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why isn't it enforceable? State attorney general notices his kid's social media app is giving algorithmic instead of chronological results, subpoenas social networks for number of under-18s in Minnesota, files charges, court sets up enormous fine. Which part of this process is impossible?
If GDPR is possible, this is also possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trends in teen suicide don't seem to have changed that much. 1991-2017 https://www.childtrends.org/indicators/suicidal-teens 2012-2020 https://www.americashealthrankings.org/explore/health-of-wom...
Yes, "only" a 33% increase from 2012 to 2020.
The sophistication of manipulation and control is highly granular in todays world, even a keyboard typing pattern can give away emotion which some can exploit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why isn't it enforceable? State attorney general notices his kid's social media app is giving algorithmic instead of chronological results, subpoenas social networks for number of under-18s in Minnesota, files charges, court sets up enormous fine. Which part of this process is impossible?
Kids will lie about their age. They already do. You aren't supposed to sign up until you are 13. There are lots of pre-teens on Social Media. Stopping that would mean a KYC process for every social media signup. I don't think that works either.
The title makes it sound more general, e.g. like under-18's couldn't use social-media at all. But instead, it sounds like they don't want under-18's having user-generated content individually targeted at them, or something like that.
I'd guess that the concern would be echo-chamber effects? This is, if users get targeted with content algorithmically selected just for them, then it may tend to silo users' perceptions. And that might be especially concerning for less-experienced users, who may not realize it's happening or see stuff outside of that bubble.
The internet, and specifically the web, is pretty much all user generated. It's the the corporate spam and walled gardens that are new should be highly regulated because the corporations themselves have incorporated and abstracted away all liability for their actions. It's the trade off.
But applying this nonsense to human persons is wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure what you're looking at. There is a clear, sourced, and cited upward trend in teen suicides between 2012 and 2019.
Yes, there is an trend upward since the mid 2000s. I was just expecting a 10x.
okay? I guess everything is fine then.
This 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.
So once you are of the age you can concealed carry a firearm you are also fit to watch TikTok? Those seem equal... /s
You can sign up to join the army at 17 to kill and die for the elites. But you can't buy liquor til 21.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If GDPR is possible, this is also possible.
Because that really worked out well?
As an example, I work for a European company whose product tracks people in an indoor space, as a byproduct of its main function.
Our (German) CEO made it clear we were constrained in our product development by GDPR's stipulations around pseudonymous data and data retention.