41–50 of 580 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can already access 3blue1brown[1] content without youtube. They just have to visit the site with the same name. 1. https://www.3blue1brown.com/#lessons
Those are just page after page of embedded YouTube videos. It's doubtful that's a meaningful difference under this bill.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where does this myth come from? It's quite the opposite. For example, around 30 years ago hundreds of thousands of Australians willingly handed in their guns. And they accepted new laws that mostly prevented them from owning guns, and by that using them for self-defense.
I think that was a buyout. Government offered money for the guns.
Completely banning all of YouTube feels like throwing out the baby—valuable educational content—with the bathwater—everything else. It seems more effective for YouTube to offer a dedicated educational platform, like education.youtube.com, with content filters built in. That way, students could access channels like 3blue1brown without exposure to unrelated or less appropriate content like MrBeast or Jubilee. Heck, I m…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can already access 3blue1brown[1] content without youtube. They just have to visit the site with the same name. 1. https://www.3blue1brown.com/#lessons
That is not the only channel of value on YouTube. Not all of them have a website with their content available.
Perhaps this will mean a version of YouTube comes out without YouTube shorts integration. YouTube shorts, imo, legitimises the govts complaint.
I mean, a legit app, not a 3rd party one that'll get my Google account banned eventually.
I had to delete it, using:
$ adb shell pm uninstall --user 0 com.google.android.youtube
TikTok/Reels/Shorts format is really, really exploitative on the mind.
Now governments around the world are acting in unison to happily give those people what they want, and people are suddenly confused and pissed that these laws mean you need to submit proof that you're over 18. And instead of being an annoying checkbox that says "I'm 18. Leave me alone", it's needing to submit a selfie and ID photo to be verified, saved, and permanently bound to your every single action online.
People who asked for social media bans for kids got what they wanted. They'll have to live with the consequences for the rest of their lives. We all will.
Teens are old enough to find their way around any content bans. This seems like a good way to introduce teens to VPN's and skirting content regulations early. It's also dumb because YouTube can teach you almost anything, I'd say it's the "best of the worst" when it comes to social media on the internet.
My teens, and each one I have encountered through them, cannot discern a pixel from a wallsocket. They are tech consumers. Not tech savvy. My dad (82) is more tech savvy.
Completely banning all of YouTube feels like throwing out the baby—valuable educational content—with the bathwater—everything else. It seems more effective for YouTube to offer a dedicated educational platform, like education.youtube.com, with content filters built in. That way, students could access channels like 3blue1brown without exposure to unrelated or less appropriate content like MrBeast or Jubilee. Heck, I m…
But you don't need an account to watch most videos on youtube, so this isn't banning all of youtube.. right?
adding more laws that will be universally ignored by anyone with a small amount of thought and effort feels like a stupid way to solve anything, but it is absolutely the Australian Way. to quote[0] a noted philosopher: > weird how a foundational myth of australia is that we’re a nation of subversive larrikins, when in actuality everyone here is an ultracop 0: https://nitter.net/tfswebb/status/976299234491121665?lang=…
Where does this myth come from? It's quite the opposite. For example, around 30 years ago hundreds of thousands of Australians willingly handed in their guns. And they accepted new laws that mostly prevented them from owning guns, and by that using them for self-defense.
adding more laws that will be universally ignored by anyone with a small amount of thought and effort feels like a stupid way to solve anything, but it is absolutely the Australian Way. to quote[0] a noted philosopher: > weird how a foundational myth of australia is that we’re a nation of subversive larrikins, when in actuality everyone here is an ultracop 0: https://nitter.net/tfswebb/status/976299234491121665?lang=…
The only entities that can possibly control Facebook and Google are nation-states. If there is to be any regulation of them (or the content they push) at all, that's where it has to happen. These giant tech companies have demonstrated that they don't care to do it themselves. Of course individuals can decide to use these platforms or not, but if that was good enough to achieve the society most of us want to live in,…
We’re seeing the same thing in the UK currently with fuzzy definitions of what does and doesn’t need age verification, and even what verification means, and that’s leading to completely harmless communities shutting down to avoid having to risk being in the wrong while the megacorps just hoover up some more metadata about users.