Lawmakers seem to think they’re capable of solving every perceivable social media problem via legislation. Sometimes, the intents are pure but the execution is lacking. In many more cases …
We aren’t sure how this rebutts what we said. Commercial social media seems to us to be the problem for the most part, open source social media run by real people seems to be a lot healthier from what we have experienced.
If you read what I wrote, open source social media is also easier to consume and interact with in the manner I described. Usenet, e-mail, IRC, forums, even private messaging and group-chats are both healthier to interact with and less demanding of our time than “services” that bury the content we want to see like facebook and the rest.
Every single one is still around and in use by the same people who built the internet and others who get more done for themselves and open-source projects than you or I or most of us on Lemmy and the more modern de-federated schemes.
What in god’s green earth about limitting social media usage on a daily time-use basis implies anything about targetting marginalized groups? Things that are detrimental to mental health, like excessive social media consumption, aren’t magically less-so for marginalized groups.
If anything, such media is a distraction and pacifier of sorts.
There are people who literally cannot leave the house and their community is literally on social media. Are you saying their mental health would not decline if they were unable to reach their community due to some asinine law like this?
We aren’t sure how this rebutts what we said. Commercial social media seems to us to be the problem for the most part, open source social media run by real people seems to be a lot healthier from what we have experienced.
This place feels like Reddit before it enshittified. I missed those old days.
That’s somewhat depressing if so as I’ve run into so many assholes here. Still, interesting to know.
If you read what I wrote, open source social media is also easier to consume and interact with in the manner I described. Usenet, e-mail, IRC, forums, even private messaging and group-chats are both healthier to interact with and less demanding of our time than “services” that bury the content we want to see like facebook and the rest.
Every single one is still around and in use by the same people who built the internet and others who get more done for themselves and open-source projects than you or I or most of us on Lemmy and the more modern de-federated schemes.
So.why do you want restrictions targeting marginalised groups?
What in god’s green earth about limitting social media usage on a daily time-use basis implies anything about targetting marginalized groups? Things that are detrimental to mental health, like excessive social media consumption, aren’t magically less-so for marginalized groups.
If anything, such media is a distraction and pacifier of sorts.
There are people who literally cannot leave the house and their community is literally on social media. Are you saying their mental health would not decline if they were unable to reach their community due to some asinine law like this?