Weird constitution.

Weird country. More or less the rest of the world discusses to ban children from social media, but the home of social media wants new addicts to protect the income of the platforms?

The founding fathers intended for kids to use tik tok

“We gotta do something about kids on brain rotting social media!”

”but sir, then we can’t scrape data from them!”

”THA CONSTITITUTUION”

Perhaps it would have been smarter to prevent these predatory behaviors from social networks in the first place. Because it is probably constitutionally more sound to ban some behaviors rather than outright ban social networks altogether.

it is simply preventing laws from banning a modern bulletin board billboard hybrid tech that teenagers use because it would restrict access to bulletin boards for adults and minors.

I think it's funny how Republicans keep trying to push forward unconstitutional laws left and right and somehow they're constituents just keep on thinking that this is the right idea

How weird is it that the left doesn't make these connections and press it when we see people like Zuckerberg standing with Republicans while Republicans push for the laws.

Like what is lacking on the left side to make these really great observations but in meaningful ways?

People on the right seize on these opportunities every time. Within days whatever view they have is shared across multiple countries on multiple sites and influencers. But the left is like a few comments isolated on Lemmy among pictures of Ed Sheeran. We're having fun though. That's what matters.

How else are they gonna indoctrinate people to be anti privacy, right wing, anti capitalist…?

The main difficulty is defining social media in a way that doesnt restrict other modern communication, education, idea publication, operating a business, shopping, sharing ideas, etc.

Should such laws block Etsy, your family's Nextcloud, a school ran web forum that only students/parents/faculty can access, Crash Course on YouTube, encrypted communication between your family, etc?

The other difficulty is defining the term "children" consistently. Many US states have simple categories that go all the way to 18, if not later.

Should there be a difference in laws for access for toddlers, elementary ages, and adolescents?

If you think these are easy questions, I suggest you look at the dialog around the UK's Online Safety Act where they are having to answer these questions after the fact.

Granted this law was more clear cut with 14, 16, and 18 being the dividing lines, but it definitely fails to concisely define social media.

The other issue is how do you verify age, and that has been another difficult question if you think people should have reasonable expectations of privacy and aren't comfortable with the "enter your birthyear" forms.

Good.
Fuck the baby bonus parents who need the government to do their job.

It's because they're Republicans, therefore whatever they do is right.

They'll reverse the decision when those teens start saying "Stop Genocide" on social media.

100% guaranteed.

More people need to coorinate and work together on the left. That's the missing link

The right has group chats, and online communities for all kinds of stuff that I'm surprised the left hasn't built much of yet

The left uses critical thinking. They need to actually engage with information and verify it before choosing to adopt it. This takes time.

The right are scared children and adopt whatever their TV parent or religious politician tells them out of fear. This takes zero time.

Exactly, and it's not like there needs to be a weekly stand up for progressive leftist.

We just need to be aware we're sleeping at the wheel and that needs to stop. We're passively watching it all not realizing we're supposed to be participating

I doubt this "critical thinking" statement more and more everyday.

I think we're exactly the same. Both sides believe they are critical thinkers. Difference is the right for whatever reason has more Victories. If we were actually critical thinkers, we'd figure out why and adapt. Instead, we seem to be losing faster and faster because we are not learning anything. We're just doing the same shit every day and failing.

Critically thinking involves being critical of ourselves. That's something I think we actually don't do.

No offense, but have you considered that Democrats aren't left?

Because compared to the rest of the world and political spectrum, they are not "left."

So you are absolutley correct that:

we're exactly the same. Both sides believe they are critical thinkers.

Both the GOP and DEMS have the same corporate blindspots. Both think they're critical thinkers, but will defend their party as the "correct" one rather than admit that the system has completely failed to keep money away from influencing every outcome.

We have a congress and senate stacked with millionaires doing the bidding of the billionaires that pay for their campaigns instead of the people that vote for them.

The only difference between the GOP and the DNC, is that the DNC wants a slow decent into a corporate dystopia instead of a fast one that kills people unnecessarily.

Actual "left" policies requires the following discourse that is impossible for the DNC to have honestly:

• reducing the military budget
• reducing corporate welfare
• workers rights & Union rights
• increasing taxes on the wealthy

All of these things have become "too socialist" for a DEM to even bring up, and you'll justify that as them "aiming for moderates" instead of thinking critically about how every facet of our society is now corporate controlled and the reason actual "left" socialist policy isn't talked about is simply because Facebook, Google, and X own the spaces those conversations happen. Instead of actual discourse, and cooperating on collective measures, corporations make sure the algorithms they control make America too afraid and angry of overexagerated BS to not think critically about the failure of their society to move forward in two decades despite the massive wealth concentrating at the top of it.

DEMS love having a bad guy to point to. So do the GOP. Yet that finger is always pointed at the other party instead of the Billionaires that have used their unspent "Trickle Down" Reagonomic tax breaks to make society worse instead of better, because problems like unaffordable Healthcare are incredibly more profitable than a publically funded one.

Yet I'll bet you want to blame the GOP for that too. Not Senator Lieberman, an Independent, who got rid of the public option in Obamacare by simply threatening a filibuster that the Dems immediately capitulated to despite already having enough votes without him.

If you want to think critically, you're going to have to start by not pointing fingers at the GOP when the DEMS consistently capitulate on our most beneficial legislation to favor their coporate donors.

Actual critical thinking is almost impossible in America, as it requires accepting that the system we live in doesn't work, and insisting on using it the way we're "supposed to" has lead to massive wealth disparity and the loss of freedoms to corporate interests.

It's certainly not hard to see when the greatest threat to United Health and costly health insurance in the last 15 years has come from an assassin instead of our elected officials. Show me a DEM explaining Luigi Mangionis actions instead of chastising him for it.