Technology

Clearly this man is a genius.

This whole conversation is such a false dichotomy. The laws can absolutely be written such that companies are required to suspend service to any suspected child without requiring ID to use the service.

But just like pollution and everything else we've let them push the buck to us.

The problem is that politicians don't want to legislate enforcement/oversight entities as those would piss off their owners.

Democracies need to replace their lame duck politicians with ones that aren't bought and owned by the shareholder class who also own the social media corporations.

He has a vested interest in saying that, but he's right, and it would be awful

I mean, I've got boxes full of physical books and self hosted movies and Tv. At that point, I'll just stop using the internet. I need to go outside more anyway.

Nobody has better solutions to fight against botnets and targeted misinformation. Like, these are big deals that every Nation needs account for some way some how. A non-anonymous internet for the masses, and anonymous internet for those who know how to get around it should be the standard.

I'd argue that most things that are currently in the crosshairs for exclusion under age verification are also harmful to at least a third of the adult population and to society in general.

Actually maybe that's just for profit algorithm based social media and / or mass scale surveillance and personal information gathering and advertising.

The point being, if you're going to make a case for something being harmful to kids, you need to also make a case for it's being OK for adults or maybe it just needs banning outright for the good of society, see also smoking. Personally I'm in favor of leaving this in the hands of the individual and parents, and perhaps making easy tools for less technically adept parents to use.

TLDR: If Facebook is bad for kids, why isn't it bad for adults?

That's quite obviously the end goal here.

Can we make a new internet?