BRFR Cake Stop 'breaking news' miscellany

[Psamathe]

Re: Social Media and Younger Generations
I can't help but wonder if there isn't a commercial opportunity for a startup to open a Social Media service for eg <18's.

Could be UK based (and these UK youngsters really wanting to communicate with others in US/ Russia, etc.). They are not technically complex and the issue of these amazing "Algorithms" wouldn't be an issue 'cos there wouldn't be any needed, any "feeds" are just those you have chosen to follow. I'm sure some registration checks could be put in place to certify user date of birth is correct, etc.

Difficult to know the business case as I guess it could be a combination of advertising and subscription (eg free with constraints, subscription to exceed limits).

Or These youngsters who need the service for communications with friends setup closed groups on eg Signal.

 

[Psamathe]

I'm not sure that banning all of it is the answer either though.

Maybe difficulty is balance of factors. The ban might not be the best way to turn Social Media into something suitable for youngsters but pushing Social Media to change seems an endless/futile task with no end of debate before legislation then no end of consultation with the Social Media companies, then long delays whilst they are given forever to implement the changes, then threat of £2-23 fines if they don't improve compliance with the laws within another 6 months .....

Maybe a non-ideal solution now is better than an endless fight achieving limited change in 2 years?

 

[First Aspect]

Re: Social Media and Younger Generations
I can't help but wonder if there isn't a commercial opportunity for a startup to open a Social Media service for eg <18's.

Could be UK based (and these UK youngsters really wanting to communicate with others in US/ Russia, etc.). They are not technically complex and the issue of these amazing "Algorithms" wouldn't be an issue 'cos there wouldn't be any needed, any "feeds" are just those you have chosen to follow. I'm sure some registration checks could be put in place to certify user date of birth is correct, etc.

Difficult to know the business case as I guess it could be a combination of advertising and subscription (eg free with constraints, subscription to exceed limits).

Or These youngsters who need the service for communications with friends setup closed groups on eg Signal.

This doesn't solve the problem of children not playing football with jumpers for goalposts though.

 

[Psamathe]

This doesn't solve the problem of children not playing football with jumpers for goalposts though.

Personally I think the ban should have been wider, not under 16 years but under 97 year olds. Personally I don't think Social Media in the form offered by the likes of Facebook, Twitter/Musk, etc. add to society but rather have a negative impact.

 

[briantrumpet]

Personally I think the ban should have been wider, not under 16 years but under 97 year olds. Personally I don't think Social Media in the form offered by the likes of Facebook, Twitter/Musk, etc. add to society but rather have a negative impact.

FB was a lifesaver for me when I was at my worst with post-concussion syndrome, and I could keep in touch with the world of my friends tangentially, and creep out of my hole when I felt like it. But I have got it fairly well locked down to keep the shít out.

Pervs misused old fashioned phones, but it was never argued that phones should be banned.

 

[Ian H]

FB was a lifesaver for me when I was at my worst with post-concussion syndrome, and I could keep in touch with the world of my friends tangentially, and creep out of my hole when I felt like it. But I have got it fairly well locked down to keep the shít out.

Pervs misused old fashioned phones, but it was never argued that phones should be banned.

Not banned, just wiped carefully afterwards.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I think social media sites just for under 16s is a non starter. If kids under 16 can bypass systems restricting their access to adult social media, adults can (and will) bypass restrictions aimed at excluding them from under 16's social media sites. You would have to moderate such sites so heavily in order for them to be safe it wouldn't be worth doing financially imo.

 

[First Aspect]

I think social media sites just for under 16s is a non starter. If kids under 16 can bypass systems restricting their access to adult social media, adults can (and will) bypass restrictions aimed at excluding them from under 16's social media sites. You would have to moderate such sites so heavily in order for them to be safe it wouldn't be worth doing financially imo.

It's a bit like the porn ban though. It doesn't eliminate it, but by making it harder and strictly speaking illegal you reduce the impact on a population level. Which still makes it worthwhile.

(Potentially - jury still out on that)

I also think there will be a tipping point where enough countries have enacted laws that the companies themselves actually start to make it as difficult to circumvent as it should be.

 

[briantrumpet]

I also think there will be a tipping point where enough countries have enacted laws that the companies themselves actually start to make it as difficult to circumvent as it should be.

Fair point, though up to now if you're worth $1tn, most governments (especially the UK's) not only let them grab us by the wotsit, the governments actually pay the abuser in actual $s and in driving traffic there. It's no wonder the abusers haven't taken the threats seriously.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

This doesn't solve the problem of children not playing football with jumpers for goalposts though.

Do they still rub the ball in dog muck and get their best friend to head it? Ron Manager was asking.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I also think there will be a tipping point where enough countries have enacted laws that the companies themselves actually start to make it as difficult to circumvent as it should be.

I agree but I think foolproof under 16 sites are a way off yet. If they think there's enough money in it perhaps that alone will drive faster safeguarding development. The Tiktok ads about all their supposed safeguards suggests they are finally taking it seriously and the porn sites got serious when credit card companies withdrew support so maybe so.

 

[First Aspect]

I agree but I think foolproof under 16 sites are a way off yet. If they think there's enough money in it perhaps that alone will drive faster safeguarding development. The Tiktok ads about all their supposed safeguards suggests they are finally taking it seriously and the porn sites got serious when credit card companies withdrew support so maybe so.

Do we stop locking our cars because there are still people capable of breaking in?

 

[First Aspect]

Fair point, though up to now if you're worth $1tn, most governments (especially the UK's) not only let them grab us by the wotsit, the governments actually pay the abuser in actual $s and in driving traffic there. It's no wonder the abusers haven't taken the threats seriously.

Governments are not what you call legislatively nimble, that's for sure.

But hey. We've only created one generation of neurospicy psychopathic narcissistic workshy snowflakes incapable of telling tuth from fiction, so it could be worse.

 

[briantrumpet]

Governments are not what you call legislatively nimble, that's for sure.

But hey. We've only created one generation of neurospicy psychopathic narcissistic workshy snowflakes incapable of telling tuth from fiction, so it could be worse.

But what are you going to call the people under 60?