21–30 of 82 posts
why did a 12yo child have unmonitored access to the internet?
I used to be a boy scout leader. 10y/o kids routinely broke any and all blocking their parents put on. If they couldn't do it, they bought an old cheap smartphone and went to their friends/McDonald's with it.
why did a 12yo child have unmonitored access to the internet?
why did a 12yo child have unmonitored access to the internet?
This is really hard to read. It fits in with what we know about meta’s content moderation in other instances though (see genocide in Myanmar). If you are an employee of Meta or even just a user of their products, I would ask you to take a step back and think about whether in totality this company is worth working for. - doesn’t care that one group of humans is using their platform to plan to kill another group (Myanm…
Yes. Imagine creating a platform that facilitates the kind of things that article recounts and instead of dedicating all possible resources to fixing the problem being like; nah, let's just pour millions upon millions of dollars into making "the metaverse". Truly a moral void.
It's your basic jurassic park story.
But the only diff is things scaled so fast, they got the whole world inside the park, before ppl started noticing how dangerous the park is.
All the fixes will be half baked because the park itself is poorly thought out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed! While we're at it, we should also put cameras and microphones in every street corner, every public place, every household, every toilet. Everyone who refuses to do so should be considered a terrorist for refusing to cooperate with the authorities who, we all know, are infallible, only have children's interest at heart, and would never abuse their power for their own gain. We should not stop until every inch o…
we are almost there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMLsHI8aV0g nothing to hide, nothing to fear
Crimes are committed all the time using phones and yet, we do not allow phone companies to monitor, record and report the content of pur phone conversations. And they can't just add a line in a terms of service, they have no legal right to do it. (Ignore the issue of Metadata, I mean the audio portions of our calls) So why have we accepted it is ok for all of our private electronic conversations to be monitored then?…
Are you sure about that? It is my understanding all telco traffic are monitored. Some countries may have laws that prevent real time conversation/sms to be look at for a few months.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed! While we're at it, we should also put cameras and microphones in every street corner, every public place, every household, every toilet. Everyone who refuses to do so should be considered a terrorist for refusing to cooperate with the authorities who, we all know, are infallible, only have children's interest at heart, and would never abuse their power for their own gain. We should not stop until every inch o…
Is there nothing in between? While surveillance is indeed bad, also free pass is bad. So what should we do about the crimes already happening, as few as they might be?
Internet surveillance could solve child abuse, but so could nuclear bombs. Solutions to problems should be judged by the amount of collateral damage they cause.
The original comment advocates for government surveillance of all digital communication - in my opinion, that causes a lot of collateral damage.
why did a 12yo child have unmonitored access to the internet?
What is odd to me in the story was the absence of a moral compass of the child and lack of knowledge of the internet as a potentially hostile place.
why did a 12yo child have unmonitored access to the internet?
It's unusual if they didn't have unmonitored access to the internet. Helicopter parenting takes a lot of energy and technical parents can only do so much. A 12yo without a phone is a social pariah. What is odd to me in the story was the absence of a moral compass of the child and lack of knowledge of the internet as a potentially hostile place.
This is really hard to read. It fits in with what we know about meta’s content moderation in other instances though (see genocide in Myanmar). If you are an employee of Meta or even just a user of their products, I would ask you to take a step back and think about whether in totality this company is worth working for. - doesn’t care that one group of humans is using their platform to plan to kill another group (Myanm…
At an even higher level, Apple and Google devices are what allow hateful and abusive content to be created. Should they bear some responsibility and prevent us from creating such content?