I guess for me, when the term "social media" was coined, it was about friends, while YouTube was already more parasocial and more like short segments on broadcast TV (with at that time a comment section that seemed to promote nothing worth reading).
Things move on after perceptions have crystalised.
FWIW every one of those issues (except update length which is variable depending on specific hardware) can be solved by running Win11Debloat once. Persists after updates, and is a straightforward PowerShell script enabling/disabling Windows/app features without any hacky brittle workarounds.
It's the first thing I install on any fresh Windows 11 install for the past 5+ years. I get more ads on MacOS thanks to their lovely Apple TV etc push notifications than I ever see on Windows (≈ 0) after running it.
I actually prefer debloated Win 11 to plain Windows 11 because I get all the benefits like vastly superior multi monitor support with basically zero negatives.
Yes, no doubt there is an obvious first-order reason for this. It's the second order effects that I think folks are rightly worried about, but it's easy to steel man.
Not sure what to tell you--I like many others here it seems (and probably elsewhere) hadn't even heard of a totenkopf before this issue was raised. It's a non-issue. Honestly I think it's a bit strange that you think it's so recognizable.
unless it has video input, i wonder if something based on animation and timing would work, as screenshots wouldn't clearly capture motion and response time would be too slow as well
1. On one side I understand the spirit, but the demographic that is most victim of socials in my experience are 50 yo+. At family dinners, etc, it's them, not the kids, being unable to not be perma distracted by the phone.
2. This unavoidably spreads the requirement for ID verification to the whole population, not just kids.
3. Social medias should've been regulated at the algorithm level.
4. Youngsters will just migrate to platforms that don't fall under the ban.
Moore's Law as the excuse for terrible performance is a classic programmer cop-out. Just wait a few years and your pi lookup will be blazing fast, trust me.
I wonder if this will lead to services improving moderation to get themselves unbanned? They’ve been moaning for years that they do their best when we know they don’t. Maybe YouTube will get much stricter on content in the hope they can get some sort of under-16 product approved?
> For instance, when I get (got: my blood pressure is treated) migraine visual effects, I would say "lightning bolt" but thats just a textual analogue/simile. What I actually saw was more complex than that: lightning is white. My effect was polychrome.
I personally have my doubts whether it has to do with blood pressure (i had it while on medication and normal blood pressure), or that it's generated by the brain, but lack the time/motivation/skill to research this further.
My 15 year old daughter and her friends, ranging in age from 14 to 16 have more or less been unaffected.
One of her 14 year old friends was locked out of Snapchat for about 10 minutes, until she had another 15 year old friend pass the age verification on her behalf.
It's been very good for encouraging teens to learn more about networking and using AI tools to fake IDs etc.
It's not yet reached threshold levels that would actually likely see teen usage drop dramatically:
A separate piece of research found that teens thought at least two-thirds of other teens would need to be off social media for them to give it up, too. [2]
Very strong opinions about this. As someone who grew up on the internet and who prefers to browse it read-only without an account, with self-deleting cookies, ideally using some of the amazing third party front-ends out there for the likes of YouTube and co, this announcement is a bit of a "fuck you" to my way of life. Obviously a VPN will go some way to navigating the immediate effects of this but I worry for the larger eddies this might create towards a broader acceptance among platforms of enforced user identification and verification.
Also, YouTube is one of _the_ premier platforms for education. Many schools use it directly, and I'm sure every kid today with an itch to learn has found a serious part of their identity through the educational YouTube channels out there that IMO do such a better job than equivelent media a generation ago did.
I'm pretty online, I've seen that skit and I to this day don't really know what a totenkopf looks like. I'd never heard the word before this Platner business either. Surprising you're saying it's well-known. Am I in some kind of bubble?
Its more of a failure of OS vendors to provide tools for parents to properly raise their children in the digital age.
OS vendors, which are now more interested in selling ad space, than actually developing operating systems - and thus have a vested interest in separating my childs' eyeballs from my agency and responsibility as a parent.
If there were a way for me, in a default out of box OS install, to observe my kids screens, safely and securely in the context of a family unit - the same way I look under their beds for stray socks, and sort their bookshelf, and so on - then there would be less of an issue for "Daddy Internet" to be raising my kids for me, as either bullies or victims.
But in the Western world there is a very strong inclination to separate children from their parents, and abrogate the parents' rights and responsibilities with regards to raising their children - and this totalitarian-authoritarian action from the UK and Australian governments, which are both wholesale rights-abusing entities - is just more of the same.
OS vendors could solve the problem for social networking - give me better tools to administer my childs' computers, and return my agency as a parent that has for the last few decades been utterly deteriorated by the OS vendors' desire to sell more ads.
I would wager that anyone who thinks its a good idea for 'banning' to be the hammer for this nail, probably also thinks that the family unit also needs to be disbanded, for greater social control outside the family home ...
A dark, but not totally unfair take: It makes it easier for Apple to take payment for the models others provide, and even allows Apple, if they want to, to use the data to build a dataset for training their own models based on how users use third party models. It's only on Apple devices this API is used, so they split up the market by not letting developers use the same system if they want things to work on iOS, locking users even more in.
Things move on after perceptions have crystalised.