Google urges US lawmakers not to ban teenagers from social media.::San Francisco– Google has asked the US Congress not to ban teenagers from social media, urging lawmakers to drop problematic protections like age-verification technology. The tech giant released its ‘Legislative Framework to Protect Children and Teens Online’ that came as more lawmakers, like Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), pushed for the Kids Online Safety Act, a …

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The rules include things like “do not run ads for strawberry flavored nicotine vapes that are blatantly intended to be sold to kids”. That’s not harmful to teenagers.

      There might be other rules that are harmful, I haven’t looked over the whole thing, but if Google has a problem with them how about explaining that instead of making false statements. This is clearly not a blanket ban on social media.

      • Fal@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The rules include things like “do not run ads for strawberry flavored nicotine vapes that are blatantly intended to be sold to kids”. That’s not harmful to teenagers.

        No, it’s rules like “homosexual content is harmful to kids so it will be banned”.

        And adults couldn’t possibly like strawberry. That MUST be about addicting kids! Not that that has fuck all to do with what we’re talking about here. We’re talking about banning kids from being able to talk about their sexuality and gender in safe spaces

        This is clearly not a blanket ban on social media.

        Not a blanket ban, just the likely result.

        • teichflamme@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, it’s rules like “homosexual content is harmful to kids so it will be banned”.

          That would suck

          And adults couldn’t possibly like strawberry. That MUST be about addicting kids

          It’s just easier to get kids addicted. That’s why they need special protection.

          Not a blanket ban, just the likely result

          Honestly, not the worst outcome. Social media appears to do more harm than good, especially for kids.

      • Fal@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The act in question is all but explicitly about banning lgbt content online, especially for kids. It will leave vulnerable kids with 0 ways to discuss their sexual orientation, gender, etc in a safe space away from their parents.

        • Ace T'Ken@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Assuming the entirety of the rest of the world beyond social media doesn’t exist that is.

          • radix@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What world, when you don’t have money or privacy of your own? If there’s not a good queer alliance club at their school, they’re done for.

            • Ace T'Ken@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I mean, I’m 41 years old. My best friend in high school was gay. He talked about it with other friends, and I’m in a pretty right wing province.

              The internet is pretty far from the only place that you can discuss these things, and the kind of parents that aren’t going to give you the privacy to discuss also are definitely not the kind to just leave the internet alone and let you go crazy on it.

              You’re talking about extremely psychotic (and completely ineffectual methods of) helicopter parenting.

        • Fal@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Addicted to what? Being able to be able to discuss lgbt topics online where their parents won’t beat them?

          • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I mean that short cycle dopamine that all apps are pushing towards like its the new micro transaction.

            LGBT safe spaces are amazing, but aren’t representative of 100% of online content

            EDIT: I didn’t read the article don’t come at me I’m stupid n lazy, if its just another hidden homophobic law then fuck that, but IG you can’t expect anything of lawmakers

            • Fal@yiffit.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              EDIT: I didn’t read the article don’t come at me I’m stupid n lazy, if its just another hidden homophobic law then fuck that, but IG you can’t expect anything of lawmakers

              I wonder how these lawmakers get away with passing their homophobic laws