> The European Commission is set to unveil an EU Kids Act proposal restricting minors' access to platforms such as Instagram, TikTok and YouTube
YouTube is the video museum and is crucial for formation. Badly maintained, but it is where we find cultural video material and its access in civilized societies can only be granted.
> From three to 13, children can access child-friendly services under adult supervision
At a fraction of that age, some of us had been reading masterpieces without any supervision.
The article does not seem to tackle the elephant in the room: how to ensure that total, ___total__ anonimity is granted to users. (Recent news were about needing a google or apple account and certified device in europe to access the sites. Of course, we do not sign contracts with google or apple.)
Again, the spread information remains about forbidding access to resources that instead must be maximixed in use (the video museum); about feeding kids what could be trash for direly deficient minds instead of the real intellectual material we absorbed even when small children; the biggest questions about Principles (Dignity, the Decency of society - ref. anonimity) remain unclarified when they are most important.
Social media has influenced at least one Presidential Election and the Brexit Campaign to the point where educated adults were manipulated into voting against their own interests.
If educated adults in possession of their full critical faculties can be hoodwinked to this extent, then surely it behooves us as a society to put in some consensus based guardrails to protect our most vulnerable.
This is not an attempt to censor or otherwise diminish anyone's intellectual or cultural journey, but simply an acknowledgement of the tragedy of the (media) commons. It's the equivalent of going to see the Mona Lisa, and being forced to dodge some weirdo running around the Louvre in a knock-off Spiderman costume, screaming about men in women's sports.
We have laws to combat the disinformation, its just we just stopped enforcing it because it was the political's best interests. Like we actually have fined (X for 120M).
So solution is gate it behind age? It doesnt fix disinformation problem, i refuse to belive that they cant just run transcription via AI and spot disinformation to delete. If EU thinks AI is good enough to invade our privacy via chat control. Why not use this to combat disinformation? or even easier just find repeating messages and block that (since lots campaigns work like this)
Theres so many solutions before having to resort age gate, the worst is. Putting it behind gate doesnt protect from people who can vote, so what they are even trying fix there?
People also seem forget, on household, we share devices with children. So user can share +18 flag easy as parents are lending tablet for them play games. Im referring the OS level age verification system which is happening around US.
Same as "educated adults went to the library, picked the loudest books and were manipulated". They must have not been educated well enough then.
> guardrails to protect our most vulnerable
Whatever you do, you have to do it properly. Of course guardrails that are defeatist and that impact on fundamental rights are unacceptable.
> It's the equivalent of going to see the Mona Lisa
Not really: visit the room where the Mona Lisa is and avoid the unwanted rooms. It is not sensible to impede access to the Mona Lisa because of the "knockoff spiderman" exhibits and performers.
> Social media has influenced
YouTube is the place where the Intellectuals debating critical matters are supposed to be found.
> Social media has influenced at least one Presidential Election and the Brexit Campaign to the point where educated adults were manipulated into voting against their own interests.
The people voted wrong so we must censor or put a gate in front of social media. Next year, we'll simply retire voting entirely because we just can't trust people to make the right choice. This is democracy TM.
> If educated adults in possession of their full critical faculties can be hoodwinked to this extent
Of course if I asked you who you voted for or why you would probably say that you made the right choice based on solid evidence but the people who did not vote like you, no way, they were just hoodwinked or tricked. Condescending much?
> This is not an attempt to censor or otherwise diminish anyone's intellectual or cultural journey
Of course it is, you are simply justifying the censorship because it suits your purpose at this present time.
Protecting kids, stopping terrorism and keeping the population safe are always the same reasons given by governments on this planet to reduce the civil liberties of the population.
Today it's selfies and government ID to view social media and if you have something against that then maybe you are a terrorist or a child molester, tomorrow we''ll ask for the full access to your emails, text messages, browser history because we just can't trust that you are not either doing or planning something nefarious.
Slippery slope all the way but no worries, its for the kids.
And it will only worsen with impeded access to material for cultivation. The failures in education are of paramount importance and the proper orientation from people capable of saying "no access to culture, for your protection" is dubious as an understatement.
As someone that has had that experience when Timex 2068 was considered modern, and all that Nintendo did were Game&Watch handhelds, I am fine with it, there are other activities to keep one busy.
Really exhausting this tyranny of the commission elected by no one that is totally morally corrupt and the power tool of a few lobbies to advance their agenda like censoring and so.
It is because of them that the trust in Europe is at an all time low and that nationalist political movements are gaining so much traction in European countries.
They don't respect the citizen will but then pretend to not understand when far right is winning election all over Europe.
I swear that we're doing it wrong. These regulations based on age restriction are lazy at best.
The harmful aspects of social media are their algorithms and their dopamine-exploitative design patterns.
Regulate and penalise this! Put some effort in actually targeting the source of the problem affecting children and adults alike.
Don't put the onus on users having to share very sensitive (and at risk of leaking!) information in order to prove they're not kids. Not to mention how easy it is to bypass with a VPN.
> In particular, the bill bans design features such as infinite scrolling, artificial notifications and certain reward mechanisms.
Honestly I think it's good that there are more guide rails and safeguards implemented for kids.
As with any rules and regulations there will be loop holes and big corporations will still try to get away with as much as they can. But blocking the most harmful mechanisms and content while still keeping access open seems very reasonable.
> tech companies would be required to make their digital services safe by design
Sometimes I think even adults would benefit from rules blocking addictive features and mechanisms.
> [infinite scrolling, artificial notifications and certain reward mechanisms]
Of course the removal of bad algorithms is a good thing, but that is not the problem with the proposed legislation and approach.
> still keeping access open
What tells you that access will remain open? How will they implement access control? This is the big question, and the very fact that they are not replying to that clearly defines their faults.
> Sometimes I think even adults
They are again unrecognized minors of unduly age. Societies should minimize the phenomenon. Instead, they clumsily encourage it. To have adults in society you need to create and adult oriented society. To obtain adults in society you have to create the foundation in proper education.
I feel society is going in a direction where there is no longer any individual responsibility. Instead everything is delegated to the state. Can't limit your kids screen time? Not your fault, it is the evil algorithm and it is up to your government to discipline your children. Being a parent will be reduced to providing your gametes.
16 comments
[ 0.23 ms ] story [ 467 ms ] threadYouTube is the video museum and is crucial for formation. Badly maintained, but it is where we find cultural video material and its access in civilized societies can only be granted.
> From three to 13, children can access child-friendly services under adult supervision
At a fraction of that age, some of us had been reading masterpieces without any supervision.
The article does not seem to tackle the elephant in the room: how to ensure that total, ___total__ anonimity is granted to users. (Recent news were about needing a google or apple account and certified device in europe to access the sites. Of course, we do not sign contracts with google or apple.)
Again, the spread information remains about forbidding access to resources that instead must be maximixed in use (the video museum); about feeding kids what could be trash for direly deficient minds instead of the real intellectual material we absorbed even when small children; the biggest questions about Principles (Dignity, the Decency of society - ref. anonimity) remain unclarified when they are most important.
That infra-humanity must be wiped off history.
If educated adults in possession of their full critical faculties can be hoodwinked to this extent, then surely it behooves us as a society to put in some consensus based guardrails to protect our most vulnerable.
This is not an attempt to censor or otherwise diminish anyone's intellectual or cultural journey, but simply an acknowledgement of the tragedy of the (media) commons. It's the equivalent of going to see the Mona Lisa, and being forced to dodge some weirdo running around the Louvre in a knock-off Spiderman costume, screaming about men in women's sports.
So solution is gate it behind age? It doesnt fix disinformation problem, i refuse to belive that they cant just run transcription via AI and spot disinformation to delete. If EU thinks AI is good enough to invade our privacy via chat control. Why not use this to combat disinformation? or even easier just find repeating messages and block that (since lots campaigns work like this)
Theres so many solutions before having to resort age gate, the worst is. Putting it behind gate doesnt protect from people who can vote, so what they are even trying fix there?
People also seem forget, on household, we share devices with children. So user can share +18 flag easy as parents are lending tablet for them play games. Im referring the OS level age verification system which is happening around US.
Same as "educated adults went to the library, picked the loudest books and were manipulated". They must have not been educated well enough then.
> guardrails to protect our most vulnerable
Whatever you do, you have to do it properly. Of course guardrails that are defeatist and that impact on fundamental rights are unacceptable.
> It's the equivalent of going to see the Mona Lisa
Not really: visit the room where the Mona Lisa is and avoid the unwanted rooms. It is not sensible to impede access to the Mona Lisa because of the "knockoff spiderman" exhibits and performers.
> Social media has influenced
YouTube is the place where the Intellectuals debating critical matters are supposed to be found.
The people voted wrong so we must censor or put a gate in front of social media. Next year, we'll simply retire voting entirely because we just can't trust people to make the right choice. This is democracy TM.
> If educated adults in possession of their full critical faculties can be hoodwinked to this extent
Of course if I asked you who you voted for or why you would probably say that you made the right choice based on solid evidence but the people who did not vote like you, no way, they were just hoodwinked or tricked. Condescending much?
> This is not an attempt to censor or otherwise diminish anyone's intellectual or cultural journey
Of course it is, you are simply justifying the censorship because it suits your purpose at this present time.
Protecting kids, stopping terrorism and keeping the population safe are always the same reasons given by governments on this planet to reduce the civil liberties of the population.
Today it's selfies and government ID to view social media and if you have something against that then maybe you are a terrorist or a child molester, tomorrow we''ll ask for the full access to your emails, text messages, browser history because we just can't trust that you are not either doing or planning something nefarious.
Slippery slope all the way but no worries, its for the kids.
I think you didn’t visit YouTube recently. It’s still a short junk video site like TikTok and Instagram.
And it will only worsen with impeded access to material for cultivation. The failures in education are of paramount importance and the proper orientation from people capable of saying "no access to culture, for your protection" is dubious as an understatement.
It is because of them that the trust in Europe is at an all time low and that nationalist political movements are gaining so much traction in European countries.
They don't respect the citizen will but then pretend to not understand when far right is winning election all over Europe.
The harmful aspects of social media are their algorithms and their dopamine-exploitative design patterns.
Regulate and penalise this! Put some effort in actually targeting the source of the problem affecting children and adults alike.
Don't put the onus on users having to share very sensitive (and at risk of leaking!) information in order to prove they're not kids. Not to mention how easy it is to bypass with a VPN.
Honestly I think it's good that there are more guide rails and safeguards implemented for kids.
As with any rules and regulations there will be loop holes and big corporations will still try to get away with as much as they can. But blocking the most harmful mechanisms and content while still keeping access open seems very reasonable.
> tech companies would be required to make their digital services safe by design
Sometimes I think even adults would benefit from rules blocking addictive features and mechanisms.
Of course the removal of bad algorithms is a good thing, but that is not the problem with the proposed legislation and approach.
> still keeping access open
What tells you that access will remain open? How will they implement access control? This is the big question, and the very fact that they are not replying to that clearly defines their faults.
> Sometimes I think even adults
They are again unrecognized minors of unduly age. Societies should minimize the phenomenon. Instead, they clumsily encourage it. To have adults in society you need to create and adult oriented society. To obtain adults in society you have to create the foundation in proper education.
It's always kids and terrorism.