- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ca
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ca
Banning kids from social media won’t work, as they “will find very quickly the ways to go around and to still use social media,” Estonian Education Minister Kristina Kallas said.
You must log in or # to comment.
I like Estonia
I’m down with an Estonia Age
We don’t need to ban social networks. We need to ban algorithms on them.
That alone will make social networks bearable and safe for most people.
God, open and fully transparent algorithms with good defaults and the ability to switch between them and fine tune them would go so hard.
Uhhh, being able to import your own algorithm would create an open source library of good algorithms … that’d be the dream.
In most countries, governments protect citizen rights in ‘public’ or governmental spaces. Private spaces, like those owned by corporations are subject to far fewer protections.
As the world has grown more developed and more privatized, what is the worth of your rights, if nearly everywhere is now considered a private space and thus not subject to those rights?
I think part of a government’s job should be ensuring that ‘public’ spaces still exist and that they exist in the forms and mediums most relevant to the culture and technology of the day.
The internet needs spaces that our rights are fully present for and that aren’t subject to the whims of a private corporation.
The internet needs spaces that our rights are fully present for and that aren’t subject to the whims of a private corporation.
Exactly. Websites like Reddit and Facebook have gobbled up a huge part of the internet and are essentially the virtual public space. I got banned from Reddit for bullshit reasons and there is absolutly no recourse. Appeals are just closed without anyone really looking at them. Making a new account is next to impossible.
Outlaw collection, aggregation and sharing of personal data. This will make these harmful spaces unprofitable.
And addictive content showing algorithms
should be looking into whos BACKING THESE bans, : its mostly the tech companies doing this.
They are not banning kids from social media they are extending mass surveillance to control the shit out of people.
100% what the lady said.
Can we please be governed by Estonia?
Based
Mossad doesn’t want that
Based Estonia
Changing behaviour and/or educating the populace is always better than censorship.
This framing makes regulating Big Tech sound reasonable. But the true lokening here is to embrace a federated web.
They want control and that sweet sweet big tech money. Obviously Kristina hasn’t been paid enough :P
I think most will agree that „think of the children” is a bs excuse, but if we know this then we shouldn’t debate this but the real reason behind enforcing verification of age, citizenship and people actually being people and not bots.
We’re being overran by LLM bullshit and we’re already overran by political actors astroturfing. We need a way out and that’s the only actionable solution on the table.
Unfortunately, it also conveniently hands tools for suppression of opinions to anyone who might be interested in that…
Given the resurgence of authoritarianism, I’m not sure that’s a reasonable trade at all.
That would be a concern always regardless of who is in power. I already outsourced military, police and healthcare to my government, I can deal with them taking care of checking if people online are people.
That would be a concern always regardless of who is in power.
True, but we needn’t hand them even more control in a time where freedom of expression is already under siege. Persecution for things you said is one concern. Lowering the hurdles for things like being “banned” from participating in discourse, automated charges for viewing illicit content (particularly dangerous in case of identity theft) or doxxing by malicious actors are far more volatile.
military, police and healthcare
The primary strategic objectives of a state, regardless of government structure*, are those crucial for its survival: to defend its sovereignty against other states and to maintain coherence within. An organised military and some enforcement of the state monopoly on violence to prevent people from robbing, ruining, killing each other, are the most effective ways to achieve that. Healthcare likewise is an important pillar of stability and survival.
The problem with individual tracking is that it gets into that difficult conflict between infringement of liberties and security objectives. I’m not convinced that the gain in security is worth exacerbating the problem with privacy we already have.
True, but we needn’t hand them even more control in a time where freedom of expression is already under siege. Persecution for things you said is one concern. Lowering the hurdles for things like being “banned” from participating in discourse, automated charges for viewing illicit content (particularly dangerous in case of identity theft) or doxxing by malicious actors are far more volatile.
I was always of opinion that if you were going to be surveilled or controlled online by government that’d happen regardless of whether you have a government ID or if your account is ID verified. We gave up privacy and freedom of who we contact the moment our communications moved to government sanctioned internet and telephony providers.
The primary strategic objectives of a state, regardless of government structure*, are those crucial for its survival: to defend its sovereignty against other states and to maintain coherence within.
My point is that internet is critical infrastructure and ability to exchange ideas on the internet is under siege from state and corporate actor funded troll farms which are now also force multiplied by LLMs. We formed states/governments so that we can act collectively in common interest, including everything from regulating market interactions to societal norms - they are the appropriate tool here since they’re selected mostly democratically.
I don’t want to be so free that I’m only free to be exploited by bullies exercising their freedoms.
