What is it about this 16 y/o cutoff that seems to be the focus everywhere? Why not 18? It almost seems like this will make SM attractive by making it a kind of forbidden fruit and/or a social standing status indicator for impressionable, malleable minded, underdeveloped minds of teens seeking to feel like adults. In other words, if I didn’t know any better, I would have guessed that it might actually be the likes of…
Why 18? Why not 21, or 26? I agree with you that this would create a forbidden fruit, and a combination of social media becoming more desirable to under-16yo and teenagers binging social media as soon as they become 16. But the solution to that is to push the age limit down, not up. 14 or 12 would be much more reasonable ages. That gives parents a clear cutoff when their kids have to be ready for social media, and pr…
The problem now is arguably that parents are not really good at "teaching" children about SM, to a large part because they aren't "good" at it, don't underestand it, and it constantly changes too (Looking at FB here).
I would agree with you if there were some kind of solid, public input crafted specification and standard for SM to not just handle minors, but even transportability across SM/sites, and also hard user data protections and ownership laws. The idea being that possibly anything but boring BBS basically dying out because the data cannot be captured, collected, and sold like harvesting humans in the Matrix.