[ares623]

Some of us won’t. But a majority probably will.

Even more important, the kids of today won’t care. Their internet will be fully slopped.

And with outdoor places getting more and more rare/expensive, they’ll have no choice but to consume slop.

[mrs6969]

That is kids choice then, I just want to live with my own choice. I missed the day when you have no doubt about the person sending a message to you is a human

[bpt3]

> And with outdoor places getting more and more rare/expensive, they’ll have no choice but to consume slop.

What does this mean? Cities and other places where real estate is expensive still have public parks, and outdoor places are not getting more expensive elsewhere.

They also have numerous other choices other than "consume whatever is on the internet" and "go outside".

I don't think anyone benefits from poorly automated content creation, but I'm not this resigned to its impact on society.

[SchemaLoad]

The only solution I see is taxes going to fund outdoor in person spaces. As a society we very easily can afford these spaces, it's just that the people who need them most are the ones least able to pay for things.

Banning social media for kids alongside funding free or subsidised in person environments will be a huge benefit to society.