• tourist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    are you under 16

    no

    ok cool here’s a youtube short when an AI voice tells you an AI-written story over vaguely related stock footage

    The planet is fucking melting and elected leaders are writing laws on herding cats

    I’ve been using the internet for longer than I’ve been an adult.

    I still sometimes add +10 years to date of birth fields out of habit.

    Might as well have issued a mandate to nom a spoonful of sand daily.

    • Wooki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      You should have learnt by now that eating and having a home trumps (pun intended) the luxury of environmentalism. I suspect these liberals will have the same outcome that happened to the democrats

    • 100@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      easy to just always set your birthdate as jan 1900 or 1950

      • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        Notice how 11 year olds aren’t making bank accounts? It’s actually very easy to enforce age-restricted access online; more to your point, the US just doesn’t do so. Which will be our downfall as a generation raised on YouTube and instagram just hit voting age and overwhelmingly chose Donald Trump.

        • Saleh@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          That comparison is completely out of touch. You making a bank account means entering a strictly regulated contractual relationship. And for starters banks will require you to have an address and send letters to it. Do you want every online website to first send you an activation code by post?

            • Zorque@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 days ago

              Doing a real good job of building bridges to convey your ideas, I see…

              Unless of course you don’t want to share thoughts and just want to be right.

              With banks there’s a financial incentive for private institutions to provide barriers. Barriers that can still be bypassed with the right tools and initiative. That incentive doesn’t exist for media providers. They just want their content as accessible as possible. Meaning any roadblocks they’re forced to utilize will be half-assed at best.

              Not to mention it’s a stupid idea in the first place. Banning something doesn’t make it better, it just makes it more tantalizing. Just look at prohibition, or abstinence only education. All it does is create a more unsafe environment for those outlets.

        • drake@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 days ago

          I understand where you’re coming from, but if you dig deeper into the problem, I think that it becomes clearer and clearer that social media is more of a symptom than the cause of the problem. The real issue is that people are becoming more and more aware that the system is failing them - wages are stagnant but prices are soaring, protections against the worst excesses of corporations are eroding, climate change is causing people to lose their homes and livelihoods…

          People are desperate for someone to blame and for an alternative. Fascism offers easy answers that let people blame some “others” but just makes things worse. Leftists have uncomfortable answers that require you to admit your complicity in the system before you can begin to dismantle it.

          • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            And therefore will be prime targets by the government to act as an identity broker for services with an online age requirement.

    • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      We can’t fix global warming, let alone anything else, if the trend of alt-right radicalization of an entire generation continues — already a 30 point swing in just a decade, as evidenced by this last election. It’s a global phenomenon. There is simply no reason why a child should be on YouTube or Instagram or TikTok. And btw, it’s extremely easy to enforce, because in Australia they’ll just fine the corporation for every infraction. Camera + ID = problem solved.

      • Jumuta@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        Camera + ID = zero privacy for anyone

        is a child watching tom scott really a bad thing?

        also if someone doesn’t want to provide service to Australia because they don’t want to handle IDs, how would you block Australians? ip bans won’t work because a child can use vpns, and if you want to verify by foreign ID for this then you still need ID checking

        australia doing this makes it worse for everyone in the world

        also a child could also just ask their parents to verify for them

        • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          Let’s research the effects of social media on teenagers before making up our minds. As for anonymity on public forums — maybe on unpopular websites, we can keep that up, but for the big ones where everyone congregates, we tried anonymous trolling for 20 years and, as a result, every democracy is dying. We can’t maintain civilization without shared space of public knowledge, and that has been severely degraded by trolls and foreign agitators.

          • Jumuta@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 days ago

            root cause solution: outlaw advertising

            advertising is what makes social media bad, because it creates an incentive system such that more traffic = more profits, and so companies are incentivised to create conflict (radicalise people) so they stay on the site more

            • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 days ago

              Jordan Peterson was making 50k a month on Patreon when he flipped his shit in 2016. His videos were unmonetized. Similarly, creators are very vulnerable to audience capture.

              If we get rid of advertising on YouTube they’d adopt a subscription model which would suffer the exact same fate.

              I’m telling you, easiest thing is to keep kids out. There’s just no reason for kids to be on Instagram and for foreign agitators to be using social media pretending to be Americans.

          • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            Yeah Facebook isn’t anonymous at all and is full of more trolls, liars, bad faith actors, and corpos than anywhere else.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        As an American I think the color key of that chart is designed to annoy me… Actually now that I look closer I am sure the whole thing is designed to piss me off. Why aren’t they using the same date ranges?

        • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          The charts seem to show the time span for each country where the opinions of men and women were fairly similar and how they’ve diverged since. Some countries started diverging more recently than others.

      • goat@sh.itjust.worksOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 days ago

        The radicalisation of young men stems from blaming them for being straight and white. It also stems from a dividing culture of men and women. This is the product of all of those “girls / boys” memes.

        They grew up in a good, progressive world, where they understand sexualities and understand mental health. They grew up being taught that it’s okay to be diverse and that it’s okay to be as you are. But then it turns around and suddenly they’re all to blame for their race, or their orientation, things that they cannot prevent–Well, no wonder they’re going backwards. Once their favourite games and hobbies are infiltrated by wokeness and forcefulness, this is how they respond.

        Should’ve realised that perhaps forcing social equity isn’t a good idea, and blaming young men and boys for the faults of society doesn’t gain their favour. Nah, instead let’s double-down even.

        • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          Honestly, you kinda said it yourself. The whole “woke” phenomenon doesn’t exist in real life. It’s a purely online reactionary movement. The young men I work with have zero issues; they live their lives in peace. Then they get online and are told by the manosphere and red pill communities that everyone hates men and that being masculine is bad and all kinds of other UNTRUE crap that has nothing to do with reality.

          I’m not saying young men aren’t struggling. They are, don’t get me started. I’m saying that the whole game of gender wars is happening exclusively online; it’s mostly imaginary; and it’s toxic as fuck.

          • goat@sh.itjust.worksOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            I’ve experienced wokeness in real life. I was told by a woman that I hate Taylor Swift because of sexism.

            No, I hate her because she’s an environmental hazard and bland. There is also a lot of mockery of lonely men, where their anxieties and fears are handwaved away

            You also can’t say it isn’t present in real-life. Online interconnectivity is reality now.

            • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 days ago

              There’s a big difference between a sexist defense of Taylor Swift by an ignorant fan (much as men might react to the news that red meat is carcinogenic), and the hyperbolic reactionary paranoia that everything about masculinity is under attack by a woke feminist Marxist mob, which is what Jordan Peterson claims.

        • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          Nope. The radicalization is a global phenomenon that started in 2016, coinciding perfectly with the rise of the online manosphere and red-pill movement.

          • goat@sh.itjust.worksOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            It goes much more than that. It started as the rise of atheism, where impressionable young boys, wanting to be rebels discovered the dopamine rush of dunking on religious wackjobs like the Westboro Baptist Church. Not blaming atheism, just pointing out it started here.

            It then extended further to video games and gamergate. Then they started getting political, which naturally led them down to 2016 and current times.

            The point remains that the majority of them blamed wokeness

            • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              Sure, atheism was a big online movement in the 2010 era, but it was co-opted in 2015 by the “intellectual dark web,” from Sam Harris to Joe Rogan and the Weinstein fuckheads. That’s when things really started to get bad.

              The atheist movement was already fizzling out after the death of Hitchens a few years earlier, and was then metastasizing into something ugly (as you said, video games, anti woke bullshit), until it was eventually subsumed by reactionaries like Jordan Peterson, who burst onto the scene with his crypto-Christian nonsense. Joe Rogan started to get more and more conspiretarded, and the rest is history.

              Anyway, the YouTube alt-right pipeline is a well researched and documented phenomenon and when I have to spend all day arguing with 15 year olds about why Andrew Tate sucks, please take my word for it, they need to be kept off of social media. They’re too stupid and vulnerable.

              • goat@sh.itjust.worksOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 days ago

                You can’t educate them or parent your own child? I don’t want to have my ID forced online just to engage in social media.

                • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  Apparently not. Right wing radicalization has all but won worldwide. It’s clear we can’t have nice things. Maybe we can save the smaller platforms? I’m open to other ideas, personally.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          This is straight up standard right wing propaganda. A much simpler explanation is that the platforms are feeding people false realities for profit. Rage gets the most engagement. Right wing propaganda works extremely well for that and as an added benefit it produces cohorts who vote in the interest of the platform owners. It’s a twofer.