Australian Senate, last sitting of the year. No idea when the Social Media Ban debate is kicking off.

If anyone’s keen, feel free to give a live run-down of anything interesting in this thread.

(sorry about all the edits, just trying to get a decent thumbnail: elevated photo of the Australian Senate)

  • CTDummy@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Wasn’t the digital ID addressed in the debate? It seems the main refutations are “it won’t fix everything immediately” and “digital ID will be enforced for everyone”. The only valid complaints I’ve heard are about digital ID which is only one of the way the government will require these companies to verify if I’ve understood the debate. I think “a small portion will work around it” is a weak excuse to avoid dealing what has been a big problem practically since the inception of social media.

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Misinformation and snake oil salesmen have been issues since we invented society. This is the new iteration of it. Decrying it as the new biggest bad no one has ever seen before that must be slain is an absolute copout.

      ‘They will get around it’ - how is that a weak argument? I can guarantee you it will not be a small portion. The entire purported point of this is to ‘protect’ children from being exposed. If they’re not protected whats the point? Why do this? To make yourself feel better and performative? That’s the same fuckin’ cancer in a new hat

      As others have pointed out, the issue is media literacy, a blanket ban won’t resolve that. And what good will unleashing a bunch of uneducated and unexposed sixteen year olds on reddit do anyway? We’ll still have the same damned issue, only with older people. Hell, my in laws got sucked into the conspiracy cooker shit and they’re hitting 70.

      SM is attractive as it’s a wider society to play in. The bad faith actors attract and prey on people who are receptive due to issues outside of SM, actual rl societal issues and banning kids will just add a delicious slip of forbidden fruit to the fuckers.

      • CTDummy@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        The proper comment is here but I’ll quote.

        “In the future we are going to look back on seeing children use iPads that directly connect them to the most sophisticated engagement and manipulation algorithms ever as something as horrid as a child smoking a cigarette, or doing any other drug”

        Are you aware of dark patterns? How’re they’re all through websites and games now? To the extent that AI now inadvertently writes websites to include because practically all data their trainings are polluted with them? Simply “educating” people out of what amounts to nearly hostile platforms and algorithms is ludicrous. I get a lot of the criticism for the bill I do. People try to pin this as people crying “think about children” and “just let parents work it out” are woefully misinformed and parent have been failing for decades now.

        I also thinks it worth noting that the senators in opposition (and unsurprisingly now commenter) all seems to be using highly emotive language to criticise the bill. A lot of reducto ad absurdum going on as well (like 3 comments I’ve seen so far with “think of the children” nonsense). Frankly pretty telling.

        • Taleya@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          I think you’re rather missing the point.

          Yes, we have dark patterns, we have algorithms subtly coded and designed to drive us towards desired outcomes. These are the problems, and hitting the age of 16 won’t make them go away. It won’t make you less susceptible. That’s explicitly why I referred to my inlaws falling down the batshit rabbit hole. There is no immunity from this

          If you actually want to tackle the issue, you educate and you punish the behaviour. This utter crap of legislation does nothing to address the issue.

    • gila@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      The social media problem is a media literacy problem. You don’t teach media literacy by shielding children from media. It’s a legislative band-aid in lieu of a solution that we can’t be assed to implement.

      Nevermind that the purported exemption for Youtube, presumably on the basis that Youtube is useful, is not objective.Tiktok and other platforms have equal potential for usefulness - and if you don’t think so, I’d challenge you to explain why?

      • CTDummy@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        The proper comment is here but I’ll quote.

        “In the future we are going to look back on seeing children use iPads that directly connect them to the most sophisticated engagement and manipulation algorithms ever as something as horrid as a child smoking a cigarette, or doing any other drug”

        Are you aware of dark patterns? How’re they’re all through websites and games now? To the extent that AI now inadvertently writes websites to include because practically all data their trainings are polluted with them? Simply “educating” people out of what amounts to nearly hostile platforms and algorithms is ludicrous. I get a lot of the criticism for the bill I do. People try to pin this as people crying “think about children” and “just let parents work it out” are woefully misinformed and parent have been failing for decades now.

        • gila@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          It’s pretty bad, but the hyperbole comparison to a global leading cause of premature death is a bit over the top. Besides, as I previously addressed: this legislation will not solve the problem, neither by its intent or practical application.

          The Luddites had good points, but ultimately the species continues marching forward and is better off for it.