|
|
|
|
|
by somenameforme
14 days ago
|
|
I don't find this particularly compelling. I am a privacy advocate, but you already surrender such on modern social media thanks to the requirement of linking your telephone number to your account, and most (all?) major sites already require identification when accounts are flagged for reasons at their own whimsical and arbitrary discretion. To say nothing of how the vastly overwhelming majority of people use social media. Beyond this, advocating for privacy is not some prime directive that overrides everything else. The more fundamental issue is that social media is a complete cancer on society. Of course so are alcohol, tobacco, gambling, and many other vices, but the difference between social media and those other vices are that the others are age constrained. Age constraining is not only a completely reasonable standard, but exactly how we treat near to everything else of a similar, or arguably even lesser damaging, profile as social media. |
|
None of this is being proposed in concert with the age laws for social media. The age limits are the least effective part of the control of adult alcohol and cigarette consumption.