• schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    I continue to believe that in the US, the First Amendment prohibits any level of government from requiring operating systems in general to implement any features whatsoever. Distribution of software, including operating systems, in source or compiled form, is covered under “the freedom of speech”.

    If the government thinks this is just product regulation, then fine, but then the law should be limited to operating systems preinstalled on devices.

  • jtrek@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    3 hours ago

    If they know the social media algorithms are harmful why don’t they deal with that? Like Facebook tried to see if they could just make people sad by tweaking their algorithm (they could) and no one faced consequences.

    The answer is money and corruption, I expect.

  • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    4 hours ago

    There’s a lovely feature of open source… you can just change it however you like.

    I’m weirdly supportive. Putting walls between teens and boobs is the real incubator for future technical leaders. I would know.

    • HelloRoot@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      I’m weirdly supportive

      or you know … lets not block the normal sexual development of kids into normal functioning adults by repressing their desires and punishing them thus turning them into weird violent psycho rapists…

      Here are some links to read on that topic:

      https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/all-about-sex/201601/evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault

      https://premium-papers.com/the-link-between-pornography-and-violence-against-women/

      https://www.utsa.edu/today/2020/08/story/pornography-sex-crimes-study.html

      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32691692/

      • DonutsRMeh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        19 minutes ago

        I think porn for kids is a huge mistake and a very bad idea for humans in general. It builds fantasies in kids’ heads that don’t happen in a normal relationship. Basically, they raise the bar too high for kids and set their expectations too high that normal sex becomes straight up bad.

        That of course doesn’t mean I agree with age verification. There has to be a better way to “protect the children” than fucking everyone else up.

      • JTode@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Access to the porn that appears on the internet has nothing whatsoever to do with normal sexual development. Kids don’t need to know about anal prolapse videos.

        • HelloRoot@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          porn that appears on the internet = anal prolapse videos

          that says more about the kind of stuff you seek out than saying anything in favour of the point you’re trying to make.

          I never saw anything like that before I was long past being a grownup and I had free access to the internet since I was a teen.

          • ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            13 minutes ago

            I saw two girls one cup very early on, along with Isis beheading videos and the fake pain olympics clip. You don’t need to be into stuff to be exposed to it on the internet.

            With that said, censorship isn’t an answer. It’s a great way to promote tech literacy and cyber security skills in horny teen boys, but doesn’t do much else besides be an excuse to increase the surveillance state at the will of capital.

            The only effective solution is terrifying (/s) so I fear that a nanny state may be the only alternative, because otherwise parents have to do the unthinkable: talk to their kids.