“Why the education system is horrible and needs to be dismantled and entirely reconsidered” is slightly off topic, but yeah you got me I do not think the argument is all that different wrt education. It is very different from those other things though.
Its perfectly relevant to my point, which is that the government is already involved in the sort of behavior we’re discussing. If we accept that preventing societal damage, or promoting social well being, or whatever else you want to call it, is a part of what the government exists to do, then why would something like preventing mega corporations from hijacking the development of children fall outside its purview?
I accept that providing social commons which are largely independent from culture and belief is the legitimate purview of the government, but there should be a line right there because when governments manipulate their populations to think or behave a certain way it usually isn’t towards the best interests of the people.
Which isn’t to say that nothing should be done to prevent mega corporations manipulating people, I just don’t think that should come in the form of things like, for instance, what they’ve actually done with TikTok since this article was written, which is mandate the creation of a US specific version that is obligated to be increasingly friendly to the propaganda interests of the current regime. I think that any solution in the form of a formal government regulation will be subject to that kind of corruption, and real solutions need to be found elsewhere.
I think that any solution in the form of a formal government regulation will be subject to that kind of corruption, and real solutions need to be found elsewhere.
I think that’s a fair statement as it relates to the current US government but I don’t think that’s a valid general philosophy. I agree that our current priority should certainly be to implement a government that can be trusted to regulate things effectively. If that isn’t taken care of first then the rest doesn’t matter. As evidenced by, well, everything happening right now haha. Still, the ultimate goal should be government action on this topic because we cannot solve the problem at an individual level. Some people can have better outcomes than others but there’s no level playing field without government intervention.
When I was a kid I wouldn’t dream of wearing a stackhat riding my bike. Then the laws came in, everyone did and it was fine. Same as seatbelts.
This is even more so because of the network effects.
Don’t get me wrong - the Australian laws are a very blunt instrument & I hate the idea of having to identify myself to the government. Fortunately it hasn’t happened to me - yet.
Can’t say the law for kids to wear helmets on bikes has done much to get them to do so. Though I don’t think bike helmet laws did much to rob the population of their privacy either.
I don’t think they approach necessity tbh. At best, they’re a bandaid, and a crutch for parents.
But the drawbacks of the laws that have been implemented so far, and are trying to be, as vast overreaches that give a false sense of security with no real benefit. They also do that by placing even more information into the hands of the very companies causing the problem in the first place.
That’s where regulations would focus in an ideal world, limiting the companies from causing the problems in the first place, not slapping bad patches over them.
Bummer that they’re necessary, but they are.
Yeah bummer that big daddy fascist leader is necessary, but they are.
They are not. It’s not the governments job to parent the nations children, (and conveniently erode our privacy in the process)
How is this argument different from “it’s not the governments job to provide healthcare / education / social services”
Providing healthcare and social services is not inherently about controlling how people think and what information they have access to.
I notice you left education off that list
“Why the education system is horrible and needs to be dismantled and entirely reconsidered” is slightly off topic, but yeah you got me I do not think the argument is all that different wrt education. It is very different from those other things though.
Its perfectly relevant to my point, which is that the government is already involved in the sort of behavior we’re discussing. If we accept that preventing societal damage, or promoting social well being, or whatever else you want to call it, is a part of what the government exists to do, then why would something like preventing mega corporations from hijacking the development of children fall outside its purview?
I accept that providing social commons which are largely independent from culture and belief is the legitimate purview of the government, but there should be a line right there because when governments manipulate their populations to think or behave a certain way it usually isn’t towards the best interests of the people.
Which isn’t to say that nothing should be done to prevent mega corporations manipulating people, I just don’t think that should come in the form of things like, for instance, what they’ve actually done with TikTok since this article was written, which is mandate the creation of a US specific version that is obligated to be increasingly friendly to the propaganda interests of the current regime. I think that any solution in the form of a formal government regulation will be subject to that kind of corruption, and real solutions need to be found elsewhere.
I think that’s a fair statement as it relates to the current US government but I don’t think that’s a valid general philosophy. I agree that our current priority should certainly be to implement a government that can be trusted to regulate things effectively. If that isn’t taken care of first then the rest doesn’t matter. As evidenced by, well, everything happening right now haha. Still, the ultimate goal should be government action on this topic because we cannot solve the problem at an individual level. Some people can have better outcomes than others but there’s no level playing field without government intervention.
deleted by creator
When I was a kid I wouldn’t dream of wearing a stackhat riding my bike. Then the laws came in, everyone did and it was fine. Same as seatbelts.
This is even more so because of the network effects.
Don’t get me wrong - the Australian laws are a very blunt instrument & I hate the idea of having to identify myself to the government. Fortunately it hasn’t happened to me - yet.
Can’t say the law for kids to wear helmets on bikes has done much to get them to do so. Though I don’t think bike helmet laws did much to rob the population of their privacy either.
I don’t think they approach necessity tbh. At best, they’re a bandaid, and a crutch for parents.
But the drawbacks of the laws that have been implemented so far, and are trying to be, as vast overreaches that give a false sense of security with no real benefit. They also do that by placing even more information into the hands of the very companies causing the problem in the first place.
That’s where regulations would focus in an ideal world, limiting the companies from causing the problems in the first place, not slapping bad patches over them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Nanny