The only solution is to educate our children about life with digital abundance. Throwing them into the deep end when they’re 16 or 18 is too late. It’s a wonderful and weird world.
I’ve been seeing this or some variant of it, as if current protections are sufficient and we just need better parents. Yet having this provides another layer to teach and monitor.
Also the damage social media does for a 16 year old is far less than an 11 or 13 year old.
It’s more about experience than age. If you prevent 13 year olds from gaining online experience, they’ll have the same level of inexperience when you expose them to the internet at 16.
So you agree it’s good to expose them in a limited way between 13-16 so they gain some experience without being preyed on by predators like Epstein and Kotick?
You agree the law is good then or do you think we should hook babies up to iPads to build up immunity like RFK and the antivax cultists that believe in chickenpox parties over regulations.
I’ve been seeing this or some variant of it, as if current protections are sufficient and we just need better parents. Yet having this provides another layer to teach and monitor.
Also the damage social media does for a 16 year old is far less than an 11 or 13 year old.
for anyone still on the fence if astroturfing bots are on lemmy.
exhibit A.
It’s more about experience than age. If you prevent 13 year olds from gaining online experience, they’ll have the same level of inexperience when you expose them to the internet at 16.
So you agree it’s good to expose them in a limited way between 13-16 so they gain some experience without being preyed on by predators like Epstein and Kotick?
You agree the law is good then or do you think we should hook babies up to iPads to build up immunity like RFK and the antivax cultists that believe in chickenpox parties over regulations.
Or even a 6 year old judging by the amount of literal toddlers with full blown iPads