91–100 of 109 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How often have you seen gore or CSAM on Facebook?
Did you reply to the correct thread? What does this have to do with TikTok China vs US
I know this sounds defeatist but, I don't know why anyone even bothers to report things like this anymore. Meta doing something they're not supposed to do, even after promising they'd never do it again? This isn't news. This is a Thursday. Our governments aren't going to do anything about it. We all know it. In part because not enough constituents are complaining loudly enough (or, you know; at all) about these compa…
I agree it is hard to not feel defeatist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason for the US government banning TikTok is not that TikTok is a worse product (it is superior). The reason is that it is a massive geopolitical risk. People often conflate these two.
I find it bemusing that people continue to pretend that some TikTok videos can just completely brain-warp people, when domestic politicians paired alongside US intelligence agencies, countless astroturfed social media accounts, and a completely dysfunctional and collaborative media system can't make people think what they want them to.
It can't look like obvious propaganda; people wouldn't use it. It doesn't have to convince people of any one thing to work anyway. Just shortening the average attention span would be enough to weaken a society a little. How about increasing polarization? People produce plenty of polarizing content on their own; just favor that a little more than an algorithm merely trying to be addictive does. Antisocial and self-destructive behaviors should also get a subtle algorithmic boost. Aggrandizing the platform itself is harmful as well - if someone chooses to be an influencer instead of a scientist, damage is done.
If those all sound like things most social media does, that's the point. It's like popularizing a junk food that's just a little higher in sugar, fat, and salt than the rest. Harmful elements of social media are harder to measure than that though.
I know this sounds defeatist but, I don't know why anyone even bothers to report things like this anymore. Meta doing something they're not supposed to do, even after promising they'd never do it again? This isn't news. This is a Thursday. Our governments aren't going to do anything about it. We all know it. In part because not enough constituents are complaining loudly enough (or, you know; at all) about these compa…
Besides just not using these services, wouldn't it also be necessary to divest any investments in any of these companies (even if through mutual/index funds, etc.)? I agree it is hard to not feel defeatist.
I am disappointed that parents allow 13 year olds to have iphones + social media accounts. The downsides have been well-documented. [1] Can we all collectively get together and say "no" to that stuff until like 18? [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI6rX96oYnY
There is a finite amount of control that you can have, there's always a friend with another phone where they can watch everything.
Communication is the key, we talk a lot with our 11 yo about the danger and pitfalls of social media, electronic games etc. Yes, he has a simple smartwatch (bare minimum: call, location), yet I think we managed to develop a healthy digital hygiene. I wish you best luck!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I was younger porn was a properly seedy thing that people would consume but almost no-one knew anyone that 'did it'. Nowadays you have OnlyFans models or similar basically all over every social media platform, businesses trying to sell it as a legit lifestyle, etc. It's completely different, because it's becoming much more bidirectional and open now.
Porn and OF are not similar. Porn is more of a job and OF a lifestyle
They're both still porn and they're both definitely a lifestyle. One does not merely "do porn".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it a risk?? Are the communists cackling with glee as they steal all those 30 second clips of teens doing the cinnamon challenge?
If your algorithm can convince large numbers kids to snort cinnamon and eat tide pods for dinner, bending their perceptions enough for them to vote or not vote for something would be a piece of cake.
Honestly this whole thing reeks of the satanic panic type moral scares of the 80’s or the anti communist rhetoric of the 60’s repackaged in new form. Moral panic over something or other is an American tradition; right now it’s tiktok but god knows why.
Set yourself a reminder to come back to this comment in 10 years once the fervor has died down and you will read your own comments with bafflement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is probably possible to manipulate people to further your political goals in an automated fashion using these technologies. In fact you can manipulate insane numbers of people in all kinds of ways with them.
This runs into a simple logical problem. The powers that be would love nothing more than to be able to do exactly what you're describing. And they have effectively endless resources at their disposal alongside dysfunctional intelligence agencies, a completely dysfunctional and obsequious media, and social media sites that have no doubt all signed up for PRISM and its likely even more insidious successors. Yet society…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We appear to be arguing over semantics. The points being raised here are variations of the following questions: how much is a human life worth, and whose responsibility is it to preserve that life? If you want to poison yourself, is anyone under any obligation to stop you from finding or giving you that poison?
Let’s stop with the semantics and get down to specifics.
It's not the Internet's or Society's job to raise your child.
If you're a parent and you dont want your teen to look at adult instagram its your job to give them some rules and enforcement.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Zuckerberg_Senate_Transcript_...