49
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago

I am a little unsympathetic to the notion that people can't socialize without social media.

You have phone calls, texts, email, snail mail, face-to-face conversations, sports, community activities, etc. Call your friends, get on bikes, and go have an adventure.

[-] Nanzer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 2 months ago

They're the victims of a lot of money being poured into making sure they don't use other means of communication. I'm sure they'll figure it out. I don't think you have to be unsympathetic to these kids to also tell them to explore other forms of social interaction

[-] Colloidal@programming.dev 3 points 2 months ago

Nobody has to feel anything, including sympathy. People are free to feel whatever, as long as they act responsibly.

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

'Victim' is the correct word.

These young people were fed into a digital ecosystem that is 100% meant to be harmful to their brains in order to get them to buy shit they don't need. If we lived in a just world Facebook would have been held criminally accountable when it was disclosed in 2014 that they were conducting experiments on their users by tweaking their news feeds in order to manipulate them.

Thanks to the addictive element of these applications it will require effort to reorient themselves into this new reality, but that's better than living in front of a screen. In time, they'll learn that but it is going to be a learned skill.

[-] Colloidal@programming.dev 13 points 2 months ago

Yeah. Of the myriad reasons to criticize such a move, getting kids out of reach of the dopamine manipulations of vulture capitalists isn't one.

[-] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago

That being said, the better solution would have been to regulate the social media companies to not manipulate people

[-] Colloidal@programming.dev 1 points 2 months ago

No doubt. It's a shitty move. But it's also shitty reporting focusing on "kids miss social media" while there so much bigger issues with the law. It generates noise and disperses criticism. It only benefits surveillance capitalism.

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Absolutely.

And the 'woe is me' thing just doesn't jive with me, having grown up without social media and knowing the benefits of analog friendships.

[-] EggInDisguise@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 2 months ago

"having never experienced the world from their situation, I have no sympathy for them"

Okay boomer. I grew up before chat rooms and cell phones too, but I choose to be less judgemental to people who haven't had the same life experiences I have.

[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Haha yeah fuck those disabled and neuro kids that have trouble with all the previous examples! “We turned out fine,” right?

[-] bootstrap@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago

Yea, great reason to continue to let them be exploited, manipulated and have their data harvested by big tech.

How many of these absolutely worthless trends that last 2 weeks and dangerous "challenges" propogate on social media? All of them.

You don't think neurodivergent and disabled kids would be more susceptable (is that how its spelled?) to that?

The argument for community and inclusion through big tech social media is bullshit too because there are plenty of other digital forms of communication that can cater to that - issue being big tech has them all convinced its the only platform for it.

So all up not quite sure what your point is?

For clarification, I do not support identity checks for age verification. I support kids getting off exploitative platforms that are proven to negatively impact them. If FB and the like stayed like it was in 2012 and didnt devolve into the manipulation machine it is now I wouldnt even be typing this.

[-] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 months ago

Hostile infrastructure to cyclists and pedestrians is commonplace outside of a few nations.

Phone plans are far more expensive compared to VOIP/messaging platforms, and snail mail? Where'd you get that idea, dinosaur?

Face to face conversations are very uncommon outside of events which require peers (work, education), so unlike, say, a group message chat, far more coordination is needed for something that may not be possible for all participants.

Community centers are dead, at least in north america, and sports are gatekept.

I could go on, but online third spaces are my generation's escape from the horrible reality we find ourselves in. Sorry we don't live in the 90s or earlier anymore, dino.

[-] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 months ago

But the governments that are penalizing social media, were already penalizing most of those stuff as well. In particular face-to-face, community activities and anything that could be understood as a third space.

[-] ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

Also, suggesting bikes is like stochastically murdering children in modern cities.

[-] jnod4@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago

Especially in places like Malaysia lol

this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2026
49 points (93.0% liked)

Privacy

6064 readers
54 users here now

Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.

Rules

PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!

  1. Be civil and no prejudice
  2. Don't promote big-tech software
  3. No apathy and defeatism for privacy (i.e. "They already have my data, why bother?")
  4. No reposting of news that was already posted
  5. No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
  6. No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)

Related communities:

Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS