[defrost]

It's a real problem fumbling for a solution - there is a business to be made here.

> Especially that once rights are taken they are much harder to get back.

American?

I'm Australian and more inclined toward keeping a foot on the neck of government and on task with what the citizens appear to want.

The current lot aren't doing a great job on limiting child access so far, but the situation is evolving.

Should it get to the point where I feel I have to take up arms and go and shoot the people we elected I'd see that as a failure on our part.

[Skyy93]

>American?

Nope, German. Would I be American I would probably phantasize of taking up arms to overthrow the dictatorship, without the realization that I probably just would die since the military is much better equipped than me.

[defrost]

As Australians we veer toward large unarmed crowds and telling 'em to get on with the job or get the f' out so we can re elect new ones.

We have a hybrid UK / US "Washminister" system with mandatory voting, obligatory BBQ's, proportional voting and relative isolation.

That isolation is now being punctured and we're seeing unpopular parties that tank whenever they're asked questions in public suddenly get a boost from being "social media" only and trading on "algorithmic" boosts courtesy of unpopular billionaire backers.

That one is more of a pressing issue, albeit related, than parental control of media access.

[Skyy93]

Do you think we don't do the same in Germany? Might be a bit different system, but I would appreciate if you would not treat me as if I don't know anything about democracy. Voting and protesting might seem nice on paper, but people are stupid or kept stupid, for example crime rates are dropping for years but people feel unsafer because of higher media coverage.

However, now we are talking about something different and this is also something I can support much more. Algorithmic boosts and these slot machine like systems are a problem, which I highly agree. Then a ban of all of these systems would be something you would rather advocate then advocate for selective bans. For example, yeah social media can continue to exist but only a very simple algorithm can be used where a user can subscribe to topics he/she chooses. No recommendation, no trending stuff.

[defrost]

> Do you think we don't do the same in Germany?

My apologies, I was unaware that Germany had a Washminister system with mandatory proportional voting.

> I would appreciate if you would not treat me as if I don't know anything about democracy.

My assumption was that the implementation of democracy varies by country. It was foolish of me not to know that you know everything about every democratic system on the planet and I apologise again for that.

> for example crime rates are dropping for years but people feel unsafer because of higher media coverage.

Well, some people do feel that here, for sure, although it hardly feels like a majority; is that a universal feeling in Germany, that Germans are stupid and easily led by media?

> For example, yeah social media can continue to exist but only a very simple algorithm can be used

The issue there is belling the cat - who are we, in Germany and Australia, to tell a US billionaire such as Musk or Zuckerberg what it is that they must do?

[Skyy93]

Do you read what I wrote?

>Might be a bit different system, but

I specifically said that we have different systems. However, the overall process does not differ so significantly that we would not be able to vote people out of power if we want to, which was your original point where you argued about systems.

>that Germans are stupid and easily led by media?

Not everyone, but enough are such that similar to the americans we start to vote for right-wing politicans which promise much, but will not solve the problems. From what I heard you Australians have the same issue with "One Nation".

>who are we, in Germany and Australia, to tell a US billionaire

For what are we having a goverment if they are not impose laws that are binding for companies? A US Billionaire can do whatever they want in a country as long as its legal. The EU recently ruled that Google has to pay 1 billion since they seem to favor their own apps and thus creating a monopoly. In the end Google will comply as the EU market is large enough.

[defrost]

Yes I did indeed read what you wrote, and the tone- you noticed I matched the tone? Probably best we both drop that, 'eh? I'm enjoying the general exchange.

> Australians have the same issue with "One Nation".

Hell yeah - they had no real public traction other than a proportional representation in government (enough to show up as a body, not enough to carry any real weight in big decisions) until external agents of chaos decided to boost them via social media for the fracture value (divide, conquer).

The EU has economic weight on par with the US, neither Australia nor Germany alone have that.

Mayhap we should pull a political Eurovision* and join the EU to fill that UK shaped void?

I agree that a US Billionaire can do whatever they want in a country as long as its legal, unfortunately that includes drawing things out for a very long time, folding and reforming under another business name, etc.

Making laws stick for those with the resources to dodge is akin to nailing jelly to the wall.

Returning to thread topic, Australia's social media teen and preteen ban, that's got a long way to go before it sticks, if at all - it's a law that asks US billionaires to not treat children as future product to be groomed and exploited.

As a citizen I'm more than open to other approaches.

* Australia | Grand Final | Eurovision 2019: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo5H62mCIsg