← Back to context

Comment by JumpCrisscross

4 days ago

> there are better ways to solve the stated problem

Call your representatives. There is overwhelming demand for age gating social media (based on, honestly, good evidence). This will be implemented based on who calls in. If the status quo of technical people being hopelessly nihilistic continues, it will be written in the stupidest ways possible.

> based on, honestly, good evidence

Can't say I agree. Notice that the proposed legislation isn't specific to social media. Rather it's explicitly advanced in support of Colorado's data privacy laws as they apply to minors.

There's evidence of lots of different issues, a few age related but most not. Adults certainly aren't immune to adversarial algorithms and dark patterns and the practical need for privacy isn't limited to children. It's more that we only seem to be able to achieve broad consensus to add additional regulations where it concerns children.

  • > we only seem to be able to achieve broad consensus to add additional regulations where it concerns children

    My personal burden of evidence for prohibition versus age gating is higher. I don’t know if that’s how others think. But the truth is we are getting age gating one way or another, that battle has already been debated and won, and everyone who called in or responded to polls was almost universally in favor of age gates (in Wyoming, New York and Virginia, the states I’m more familiar with).

It's always written in the most midwit way possible, then, once predicted failure happens it's patched up to be slightly better. That's the default assumption for most of the things.

  • What do you expect? American politics selects for mediocrity. Being a world-class expert on something is a career disadvantage. Most of the electorate wants wants bullshit artists and cartoon characters.

Of course we could make predatory algorithms illegal. Or just algorithmic timelines/discovery algorithms.

Nah. Can’t stop the money. Let make brain destroying scams and ad spam legal as long as you’re over 18.

  • TL;DR We need age verification laws to prevent minors from accessing the addictive stream of toxic sludge rather than outlawing its manufacture and distribution.

    • How exactly would you do this without, you know, violating the first amendment? Algorithmic feeds are nothing without the content. People get toxic sludge because they signal to the algorithm that they like that.

      14 replies →

No, the mania is based on extremely bad/cherry picked evidence. There are at least 6 studies alone (some including meta-analysis) which has found absolutely no link to prove social media is addictive or harmful to children. If anything, they've found the opposite, and one even suggests that calling it addictive might be causing the very problem we're pretending to solve