this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
11 points (92.3% liked)

AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND

716 readers
503 users here now

This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

♦ ♦ ♦

RULES

① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.

② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.

④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.

⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.

Please also abide by the instance rules.

♦ ♦ ♦

Can't get enough? Visit my blog.

♦ ♦ ♦

Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.

$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.

 

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

People who are pro this type of gatekeeping, how would you like to see this implemented?

[–] DougHolland 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I see the problem, but don't see a solution in this Aussie strategy. An age-ban probably makes social media more attractive to a 5- 10- or 15-year-old, and anyway, any bright kid can get around it, and share their get-around with all their friends.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

We share a similar view, I think.

Although I have an additional fear. It is known that block listing (everyone but Y, Y being children here) is an ineffective cybersecurity strategy. What does work is allow listing (everyone must identify themselves, gatekeeper maintains a list of who is allowed in).

Enforcing the existance of such a tool, and having the allow list be at the mercy of political figures, now and in the future, is a scary idea to me.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

Oh our government/s have always been very big on progressing the surveillance state in the name of saving children, this is either another step toward that or it's a huge waste of time that will never be enforceable.

I'm pretty confident it's just for surveillance.

[–] DougHolland 3 points 1 week ago

Yup, beyond scary, it's terrifying.

Social media presents an array of worrisome problems, with (so far as I can see) only worrisome solutions. Children's access isn't even the #1 issue, for me — it's social media's Musky ability to flood the world with lies and hate at levels never seen in human history.

And there's no solution that's not worrisome, but democracy can't survive with an intentionally misinformed electorate.