[Symbiote]

There has been 15 more years of highly motivated psychologists tuning their social media systems to create addiction, time for those who've grown up through this to become adults, foreign interference with democracy etc.

Though I think banning it for children is the wrong approach. Ban the addictive and dangerous features for everyone, adults included — no more infinite scroll, and no more feeds showing content from outside social connections.

[pigpop]

> no more feeds showing content from outside social connections

So, kill all news agencies and reporters I guess? or would there be a carve out for incumbents so they can cement their market share? who controls the approval list?

[drdexebtjl]

News agencies don’t do personalized curation. Every reader, at least from the same city, gets exactly the same content.

[TeMPOraL]

> Every reader, at least from the same city, gets exactly the same content

That alone is a value add people don't realize even as they're losing it: it created a shared reality you and locals inhabited, that you could have a conversation about.

[iamnothere]

It also helped quite a bit with narrative enforcement.

[umvi]

Ban infinite scroll? Sounds like a slippery slope and also hard to enforce. I don't even know how you would craft such a law.

[LadyCailin]

The same way you do age assurance laws, I guess.

[petermcneeley]

What are you afraid of?

[cultofmetatron]

This is far more to do with different people having different definitions for what constitutes a genocide with one very well funded minority group having a large stake in their version being the accepted one.

[shevy-java]

> tuning their social media systems to create addiction

Except this has nothing to do with social media nor with children nor with addiction.

[Symbiote]

The first sentence of the article "under-16 social media ban".