Because they know their kids will have an advantage over the stupefied masses if they can keep them unmezmerizes.
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2026
676 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
81710 readers
6467 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Well, they know why. And they know that most of the people are stupid as a stone. This is how they made their money.
Wow what a surprise. I can't imagine anyone better to know how unsafe something is other than the lead architects themselves.
Other tech CEOs, including Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Snap’s Evan Spiegel, and Tesla’s Elon Musk, have also spoken about limiting their children’s access to devices. Gates has said he did not give his children smartphones until age 14 and banned phones at the dinner table entirely. Snap CEO Evan Spiegel, in 2018, said he limits his child to the same 1.5 hours per week of screen time as Thiel.
Seems like these failures suing them & demanding government paternalism
Yet, as the trials against social media companies continue and country after country moves toward legislating what Silicon Valley’s billionaires have quietly practiced for years
don't know how to effectively limit access/use parental controls as tech CEOs claim to do.
This behavior seems to be very similar to NFL stars and how they never wanted their kids to play football.
Everyone involved knows how dangerous social media/football is and many of them are in positions to actually do something about it. But because it benefits them personally, they won't even rock the boat.
Duh. You think the CEO of Kraft feeds his kids mac and cheese from a box?
banned phones at the dinner table entirely
I would everyone is doing this. Sitting down to eat together once a day and talk isn't something only billionaires can afford.
This isn't new. I remember fifteen years ago some Silicon Valley app engineers forbade their children from playing the games that were being developed.
It's because they're engineered to use your psychology against you. This is by design.
How cute. They think the things billionaires say for ammo in the evential lawsuit are actually true.
YouTube cofounder Steve Chen said at a talk at the Stanford Graduate School of Business last year that he wouldn’t want his kids consuming only short-form content, noting that it might be better to limit kids to videos longer than 15 minutes.
I hope this is introduced at the LA trial in some form that demonstrates the why.
I should not be amazed, but I still am, at the entire lack of morality that tech entrepreneurs have post dotcom bursting.
Yeah, but the Epstein class wants us conditioned to be as forgetful as their LLMs, and compartmentalized like good robots so we reset to compliance by default without connecting too many dots. Concentration and focus are how you exercise consciousness, which is the opposite of what the ruling class wants. They've literally attempted to and in the minds of many individuals they've succeeded in framing consciousness as a "mind virus".
They're subhumans with no morality or code of ethics whose sights are set on more and more wealth, spiralling them further into the depths of depravity and the cardinal sin of greed.
Greed begets more greed, but unlike gluttony and wrath, the billionaires' deterioration doesn't manifest itself physically, so they allow themselves to become evermore corrupted by it until they become a fountain of disease, rotting and decaying everything around them.
"Our technology is perfectly safe and harmless for all ages!"
"So you would let your own children use it?"
"Nooo. No no no no no no. God no."
"Are you kidding? I KNOW how addicting we make that shit. I don't want my kids anywhere near it."
Fucking degenerate assholes, pushing drugs knowing full well how harmful it is.
That should be enough evidence for the rest of the world…
Hmmm it appears they understand how evil all the tech companies are, harvesting data to the fullest extent. Spying, influencing, etc.
Oh they absolutely know. Zuck's Meta is on trial right now not only because Instagram creates an addiction for kids, but because it was made delibarately, on purpose. Kids addictron was the goal.
They've always known. They just don't care for the rest of humanity.
Look to the masters, the tobacco industry with additives to make it more addictive (been a while since I researched it and that's the one that popped up, but they spent 60+ years making it more addictive).
Social media speedran it with something apparently innocuous ('they trust me, stupid fucks'), and a bunch of corrupt psychologists (and marketers/advertisers also known as corrupt psychologists). Do no harm my ass, wait, that doesn't apply to psychologists, wait again, that's more like guidelines for doctors (not an actual vow in most places).
Next bill of rights / constitution needs to address this specifically, there's a reason why quacks have a special hatred (and if there were one, a special hell)...
Not to excuse that POS, but more on how we got here: You have a product that only makes money when people actively use it. How do you increase your ROI? Make people want to use it and want to use it longer. Do that by making it more interesting, more relevant, more stimulating and appear bottomless so people can use it as long as possible.
Addiction for EVERYONE is the only way FB continues to increase revenue. We just single out Children because they are most easily influenced and impacted.
Oh I'm perfectly aware this is most likely a chain of pressure and responsibility dodging:
- the top demands more users more active,
- the bottom develops some solutions they demo while refusing any responsability for its impact.
- Some middle pressed to meet demand while having only one solution available at the time eventually decide to deploy it, maybe "temporarily".
Many years ago a grocery store chain, which was rapidly becoming national, had its progress halted by a meat bleaching scandal. They set impossible goals for their meat department, knowing there was zero way to sell the meat at the volume they demanded, so the local stores were left to do illegal things to meet the impossible quotas. The higher ups claimed plausible deniability, while knowing there was but one answer.
What's even crazier, is the grocery store (Food Lion) sued the journalists who went undercover to expose it, and won. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1997-01-23-mn-21242-story.html
Fortunately, the damage to their reputation did far greater damage than they won in the lawsuit, but as far as I could find, no legal actions were taken against Food Lion.
I doubt. I think it’s more like they fear us getting to them through their kids.
Imagine doing that to your child. Raising them in an alternate world that doesn’t really exist? That’s not fearing the tech and caring about their kids. That’s control. That’s them proving their children are the same things as a car.
Does musk even see any of his kids often enough to set rules?
not if his kids have any say in the matter
I can imagine he has access to crazy surveillance of them and their mothers.
I say bullshit, these people aren't involved enough in their kids lives to even know if their "1 hour a day" or whatever rules are happening. Their kids are absolutely doing whatever the fuck they want.
I honestly think this is more likely the case. It’s a story they sell us idiots. But if it’s true, it’s not because they care about their kids.
That's what the paid 24/7 nanny is for.
The most disturbing part is these ghouls reproduced.
And they turn into whining crybabies when birth rates start dropping. It's their Achilles' heel, an actual challenge to their control.
You look at the ~~eugenicist~~ natalist couples who worship Elon Musk and you realize they are indeed ghouls, and they treat their children like non-sentient garbage. Hitting them during interviews in public. Imagine what they do in private.
That article was an insane read. I couldn't have written more unserious people if I tried
Leave it to natalists to make extinction seem the better option.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Eat the rich
the antichrist guy
the American guy who has been pushing for chat control through Europe so he can get paid destroying all privacy and spying on all European citizens through his Palintir, you mean, and ultimately delivering all power to the US.
it takes a certain kind of evil to literally recreate Sauron's Palintir. What is it Gandalf tells Saruman?, "There is only one Lord of the Ring, only one who can bend it to his will. And he does not share power." He is literally following the script lol.
Musk is the most Twitter addicted person I am aware of.
If Trump were still on Twitter he'd be a strong contender lol
And finally, Musk, who bought the social media company X, formerly Twitter, in 2022, said it “might’ve been a mistake” to not set any rules on social media for his children.
That would require him to spend more time around his children than photoshoots and using them as human shields
What, Musks too? He's not known to have much to do with family.
Most Sociopathic Oligarchs see their offspring as future organ donors, so they can live forever. The Goblin DEFINITELY thinks like that. Those kids are livestock, nothing more.
But he is known to talk out his ass
Never get high on your own supply
Half an hour per weekday and an hour on weekends with the switch, plus strict rules on what als can be used. No roblox.
But we flood our kids with books or comics. If they want to read a book, well make it happen
Kids are fine with it. Boredom sparks creativity.
Even when I was a kid, in the 80s and 90s, I spent plenty of time playing NES, computer and watching TV. This was of course long before social media.
I don’t see how you could possibly limit a kid to 1.5 hr screen time per week. How do we define screen time? If it’s only social media on phones or tablets, then that’s probably okay. But if you are including console, computer gaming, tv, then I don’t see how that’s even possible. (And of course now most games have an online component, so the line gets blurry there.)
It’s the shitty “social” aspect of online that is harming children, not the concept of a screen.
load more comments
(1 replies)
My son was never interested in video games, nor does he use any social media. Instead, he reads and watches movies.
He's a film studies student, and knows films inside and out because he's seen almost everything, from every country, from every era. He's also an avid reader of classics, and just finished Moby Dick. It wasn't an assignment, he just wanted to read it.
He wouldn't be that smart if he'd buried himself in video games and social media.
view more: next ›