fizzle

I’ve always defended mozilla after every dumb mistake, but I’m over it.

They’re pretty much just cooked at this point.

Study part time, alongside employment.

I do have kids approaching this age, but I dont see how thats relevant.

Even as a childless bachelor, any idiot can conclude that children spending less time on social media is good for society.

So it’s a bad idea when parents do it, but a good idea for the government to?

I can’t believe I need to spell this out but here goes.

If kids are generally interacting with each other on social media, then excluding your own child from that will make them a pariah. You know, like the kid that can’t go on the school camp because reasons.

With the recent ban, kids are no longer “generally interacting” with each other on social media. It doesn’t matter that some will inevitably circumvent the ban. This gives parents the opportunity to enforce boundaries.

it’s their role here, not the federal governments.

Nonsense. Federal government’s impose age restrictions on all sorts of things for a variety of reasons. There are legislated ages of consent, alcohol consumption, driving, et cetera.

So what? Most of the shittier stuff we pass does.

If something has bipartisan support then more or less by definition, you can’t argue that “we” didn’t ask for it, because everyone’s representatives are asking for it.

Which part are you referring to?

Are you honestly suggesting that imposing a hard requirement for your children to exclude themselves from the platforms on which their peers are engaging with each other is good parenting?

You personally may not want this ban, but it has overwhelming support from parents generally. Its not even a divisive issue, it has bipartisan support. Thats not to say you cant criticise it, merely that “we” really did ask for this.

What jab about your parenting? You seem kinda defensive about that actually. Maybe get that looked at.

Basically, im getting old and weird and less willing to abide corporate fuckery.

Yeah, no one wants to live with people like this?

Yes you really do seem… disengaged as a parent.

Prior to the ban, most parents wouldn’t tell their kids they couldn’t use social for fear of making them pariahs - excluded from something their peers are partaking of.

The ban provides parents with the agency to restrict their kids from using social, because at least the majority of kids won’t be there.

I dont see how the ban prevents you from having conversations with your children?

I think that something that lasts more than 10 years is by definition, not a bubble - or at least not in the early part of that period.

As you said, there needs to be something that keeps investment going. I think profit or at least lots of revenue and uptake is the only thing that could keep it going for 10 years.

Nonsense. “Only after” is a common phrase or sentence structure, amongst native or non-native speakers.

Yep.

“I manage my server in yaml. Sometimes yml.”

It doesn’t matter that it won’t go anywhere.

The point is, next time a journalist wants to say something unfavourable, their producer / legal depth will gag them.

Im self employed so I can use what I want.

I have a few assisstants who use win 11.

I use an unofficial teams appimage all day every day.

I think its probably an electron thing.

I hate having to use it but it works fine.

Sure, but again there’s no magical solution to the problem of buying land and building dwellings.

Basically, if you already have free land and buildings then you could start a co-op.

If you need th government to provide the free land and buildings then its comparable to other government housing projects.

Can you buy in for 10k and pay a quarter of the rent of a comparable dwelling?

Edit: for goolawah, you have to buy a share from a member who is selling a share, at a negotiated price. So basically, you buy the land or house at market value.

Sorry chief this is just plain nutty.

I cant really respond to that.

By all means continue believing that wanting to reduce the impact of corporate profiteering on children is “evil”.

Parental controls on most devices will allow you to monitor and regulate your kid’s youtube usage, and block alternative platforms.

Having to provide ID to access services isn’t ideal, but in the context of everything else people provide to social media it doesn’t seem very significant to me?

Suggesting that this is some kind of “betrayal” is overly dramatic, sorry.

What a silly thing to say. This law doesn’t stop parents teaching their kids they evils of social media.