• Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Sign in to follow this  
Snark

Govt wants to "ban" social media

Recommended Posts

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47019912

Disgraceful, using these deaths as a platform to threaten the social media giants into submission, to essentially gain full control over what content the public can and cannot see. They'll either tell the UK to fuck off and block our IP address ranges from accessing their services, OR they'll submit, either way the powers that be get exactly what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hail the Tripod said:

I don’t let my sons use social media. To be honest I’m puzzled why other parents do.

I do let them play online games, but with voice channels disabled except online friends i.e. user accounts (verified by me with their parents) of children he knows.

The older one is about to turn 13 and is a bit resentful that he’s not allowed Instagram. But then teenagers are supposed to be a bit resentful of their boundaries, it’s good for them. Unlike social media!

Do you actually believe they aren't just doing it anyway :ph34r:

 

 

 

:Jumping:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice how quiet they are about freedom of the internet in China these days, I distinctly believe that is the model they themselves secretly want.

It is all about control, the only difference being that in the West it has to be done more subtly so the plebs don't notice.

It will therefore be dressed as something else in the name of 'protecting' the vulnerable or similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go against the grain here and say I personally wouldn't be that arsed if social media was restricted when it comes to children.

Bringing up kids is hard enough without having to compete with the infinate weirdness and moral vacuity of the internet. As it stands it's the absolute Wild West for kids and while many might say it's the parents responsibility to shield them from that (and it is) you simply can't make any sort of headway, especially when you are competing with forces that want your kids to become part of this colossal digital sewer that runs throughout all of our homes.

While adults have the faculties to control social media input and output - though perhaps not half as much as you'd like to think- in the hands of children it's a friggin' nightmare. I know quite a few folk who are having a properly torrid time of it re: the internet and their teenage kids so, frankly, if Facebook and Instagram disappeared tomorrow I would be seriously bereft of fucks.

Edited by Sgt Hartman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody under 16 should be on the internet or social media without strict supervision.

It's up to parents to actually parent. As opposed to demanding that the Government does something.

Edited by Errol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

I certainly see a case for age restriction on widely-used social media platforms.

There is  - 18 i think.

Must of my 11yo kids classmates have FB accounts.

I  read the article in the paper at the weekend. And I saw it was being picked up by the papers.

It was just desperate blaming of anyone but the the parents themselves.

The poor girl must have a been a very upset 14yo.

The claim by the Dad that there ws not anythimg wrong with her stinks. 

Dont blame pinterest or instagram for being a hit parent who'd not picked up on the fact your kid was suicidal.

There was no input from her older sisters. I think their version might have been different.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, spygirl said:

There is  - 18 i think.

Must of my 11yo kids classmates have FB accounts.

I  read the article in the paper at the weekend. And I saw it was being picked up by the papers.

It was just desperate blaming of anyone but the the parents themselves.

The poor girl must have a been a very upset 14yo.

The claim by the Dad that there ws not anythimg wrong with her stinks. 

Dont blame pinterest or instagram for being a hit parent who'd not picked up on the fact your kid was suicidal.

There was no input from her older sisters. I think their version might have been different.
 

 

13 - which is very differemt and even then the data mining creep wanted it lowered.

Quote

 

Nearly all social networking sites only allow users aged 13 and over.

This age limit has been dictated by US law through the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).

The act at first ordered sites to seek "verifiable parental consent" for younger users, and then restrict how they could use data.

But subsequently many apps decided that it would not be worthwhile, the BBC reports.

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg vowed to fight to change the COPPA law in 2011, but the restrictions remain in place.

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/4136922/age-restrictions-facebook-snapchat-twitter-instagram/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Errol said:

Nobody under 16 should be on the internet or social media without strict supervision.

It's up to parents to actually parent. As opposed to demanding that the Government does something.

I'd agree with that. I know a few people who's pre-teen daughters are on Instagram etc.

Absolute insanity IMO. They need to have a serious word with themselves.

1 minute ago, Frank Hovis said:

 

13 - which is very differemt and even then the data mining creep wanted it lowered.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/4136922/age-restrictions-facebook-snapchat-twitter-instagram/

13 is bloody ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obvious, a tragic loss of life

But I have a problem with this

We are constantly told that movies depicting murder don't make people go and murder, that films depicting rape don't make people go and rape, that suicide in films doesn't make people do the same. There is no incentivisation, no societal relationship.

But then we're told social media can make people copy things.

is it because one platform makes box-office money from people and the other gives people a free place to communicate dangerous thoughts

 

Edited to add as @Errol has said. All that is needed is an age restriction in the form a child safe filter on the home internet

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Does reddit count as “social media”? Does YouTube?

I’m not too worried by them as although it is user generated content it’s very much subject area interest driven, rather than accumulations of online personae which supposedly represent real people. Having a largely fictitious fantasy peer group to judge yourself against is going to be seriously damaging at that “finding yourself” age, when you have little experience of harsh reality and an unformed sense of self, not to mention throwing up all sorts of unpredictable peer group pressures.

Edited by Hail the Tripod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

Obvious, a tragic loss of life

But I have a problem with this

We are constantly told that movies depicting murder don't make people go and murder, that films depicting rape don't make people go and rape, that suicide in films doesn't make people do the same. There is no incentivisation, no societal relationship.

But then we're told social media can make people copy things.

is it because one platform makes box-office money from people and the other gives people a free place to communicate dangerous thoughts

Kids are pretty good at distinguishing between make believe play and reality from quite a young age. If you play a make believe game with a two year old they will regularly remind you it’s “pretend” rather than real.

Social media is ostensibly categorised as reality rather than make believe, and plays on aligning your online self and friend groups with your “meat world” self and friend groups. This is difficult for adults to reconcile, much more so for children.

Very, very different than activities mentally categorised as pure escapism IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hail the Tripod said:

Kids are pretty good at distinguishing between make believe play and reality from quite a young age. If you play a make believe game with a two year old they will regularly remind you it’s “pretend” rather than real.

Social media is ostensibly categorised as reality rather than make believe, and plays on aligning your online self and friend groups with your “meat world” self and friend groups. This is difficult for adults to reconcile, much more so for children.

Very, very different than activities mentally categorised as pure escapism IMO.

Valid point.

I wasn't sure I was fully thinking it through. My guess is that there are people that confuse both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

I don’t let my sons use social media. To be honest I’m puzzled why other parents do (notably the big names of Silicon Valley, Zuckerbergs etc absolutely do not let their kids use it).

I do let them play online games, but with voice channels disabled except online friends i.e. user accounts (verified by me with their parents) of children he knows.

The older one is about to turn 13 and is a bit resentful that he’s not allowed Instagram. But then teenagers are supposed to be a bit resentful of their boundaries, it’s good for them. Unlike social media!

You are absolutely doing the right thing. 

I discovered that my son had just over 1200 people on his Instagram. 1150 of them he doesn't actually know. I had a fucking fit. He's off it now. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget, Google is working directly for the Chinese govt on a system that monitors the activities of everyone online in China. Both Google and, IIRC, Cisco were criticised for being part of the 'walled garden' that restricted Chinese people from the WWW. Probably other Western tech firms have been involved also.

If they are doing it for China then why not do it for every country - perhaps that is how they will make their money going forward?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Young teenage girls are very suggestable.  Look at that nonsense in b'ham with that make up guy and the hoardes of screaming girls. Plus any boyband currently in vogue right back to the Beatles.

Now if a vulnerable and upset girl is getting solace from a suicide forum (or whatever it was), then she may be inclined to believe it is an option for her.

Very tragic.

As far as parental control goes, I liked to think I was quite IT savvy until I found my, then 11 year old, son had been looking at porn thru' his PlayStation. All his mates were doing it and pictures on phones were readily available in his school - he didn't have a smartphone at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Sgt Hartman said:

I'll go against the grain here and say I personally wouldn't be that arsed if social media was restricted when it comes to children.

Bringing up kids is hard enough without having to compete with the infinate weirdness and moral vacuity of the internet. As it stands it's the absolute Wild West for kids and while many might say it's the parents responsibility to shield them from that (and it is) you simply can't make any sort of headway, especially when you are competing with forces that want your kids to become part of this colossal digital sewer that runs throughout all of our homes.

While adults have the faculties to control social media input and output - though perhaps not half as much as you'd like to think- in the hands of children it's a friggin' nightmare. I know quite a few folk who are having a properly torrid time of it re: the internet and their teenage kids so, frankly, if Facebook and Instagram disappeared tomorrow I would be seriously bereft of fucks.

It's already restricted to over 13s or 16s (?) according to Facebook's T&Cs and has been for ages. I'd fully support raising it to 18, it's a cancer on society.

If I ever become PM I'll ban them all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something to be said for being able to impose an effective ban on children accessing social media. My daughter and her friends have started to come off social media, instead they text, phone or even see each other to catch up. Started off as let's do it for a day and they have increased the time periods - they say they get fed  up with seeing everyone else's perfect lives even when they know it's not reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chewing Grass said:

Notice how quiet they are about freedom of the internet in China these days, I distinctly believe that is the model they themselves secretly want.

It is all about control, the only difference being that in the West it has to be done more subtly so the plebs don't notice.

It will therefore be dressed as something else in the name of 'protecting' the vulnerable or similar.

Bing is switched back on in China.

The whole internet was switched off in Zimbabwe.

The UK planning for Martial Law will switch off the internet here.

Social Media and the internet is the modern equivalent of the expansion of the railways throughout India. They were used by the great unwashed to transport more than people and goods.

They spread ideas.

Shutting down the internet and social media for the benefit of elites won't be actioned by grey politicians pretending to protect society and look after us.

The reaper of truth and enlightenment will have enormous plastic breasts, fake eyebrows and lip fillers. She will make us believe we should end social media.

For our own good.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m all in favour of a ban and I’d suggest they block all access to the following:

  1. Twitter 
  2. Instagram
  3. Facebook

They can keep access to Strava otherwise I wouldn’t know if or where I’d cycled.

Edited by Wheeler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hail the Tripod said:

I don’t let my sons use social media. To be honest I’m puzzled why other parents do (notably the big names of Silicon Valley, Zuckerbergs etc absolutely do not let their kids use it).

I do let them play online games, but with voice channels disabled except online friends i.e. user accounts (verified by me with their parents) of children he knows.

The older one is about to turn 13 and is a bit resentful that he’s not allowed Instagram. But then teenagers are supposed to be a bit resentful of their boundaries, it’s good for them. Unlike social media!

Your sons would probably be OK.

IIRC teenage suicides amongst girls has doubled in the last few years while for boys it hasn't changed much.

Boys are into physical bullying while girls are more into the psychological stuff which is amplified by social media.

(Surely that can't be right. Girls' and boys' brains are exactly the same !!)

.

 

Edited by Fischer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.