absGeekNZ

Necrotic puss ulcer...lovely

Indeed!

I don’t see how both these claims can simultaneously be true.

Sorry, my poor communications...I was referring to the social media companies, when I said they had been trying and failing for years. Not trying that hard mind you; moderation is a very expensive problem to solve, and they don't want to spend money they don't explicitly have to.

(it's) actually about making citizens more easily identifiable online.

Maybe. That is speculation, probably a nice little side effect. But not the primary goal.

Independent social media sites however, don’t all have the resources to implement verification systems, so some will feel the financial burden of compliance a lot harder, and others

This is a great point; and there is an easy way to solve this problem. Not that the govt will care that a simple solution exists. If you don't have an algorithmic feed a lot of the spread of misinformation is curtailed. If you are not allowed to host images/video etc directly than the moderation of them can be off loaded to 3rd parties.

What’s more, knowing that the platforms they’re using have their identities will make a great many people more hesitant to speak critically about existing power structures.

Another great point. I don't have a good answer to this one, but there are anonymous leak avenues etc for serious stuff.

In any case, this ban is literally worse than just leaving the problem be.

I don't really agree; the ban will do two things.

1/ it will show the social media companies that, Australia at least; has tools that they can use to reduce their power.

2/ show kids that this is really serious; it is not just your parents saying shit you can ignore.

Will some kids work out how to get around it; yep, 100%. Will it be a big portion; maybe, tech literacy is not as high as it could/should be.

Holding platforms accountable to a bare minimum standard of moderation against misinformation, bullying and harassment might be a starting point.

This would be great; but it is also too little too late. They have tried, and failed at exactly this for years.

And hey, if socmed’s really that bad for you, then us adults could benefit from this alternative, too!

It is that bad for you! Algorithmic social media is doing you harm.

I figure holding tech giants directly accountable for the specific harms they’ve caused

What if; the social media giants are in another country. Your country doesn't have jurisdiction there and can do fuck all in reality.

Maybe fine them???? Sure, which they will fight in court until the end of time; all the while the harm continues.

I don't know if a ban will work, or what extra harms it will cause. But there are no good options to tackle this on the large scales of whole countries.

Algorithmic social media is mind cancer; if you have a better suggestion for tackling this issue. Let us know.

Lemmy is social media; but there is no algorithmic feed, my views are not being manipulated by some engagement maximizing machine.

I'd compare you to a colostomy bag, but they are at least useful!

Party planning is going well for president Trump's upcoming 90th birthday; now in his 11th year of his second term. He said via his speaking box "this will be the greatest party, possibly ever in the history of the world, many people are saying it"

Thanks.

4 was such a big one; I knew I couldn't do it justice in a shortish post. Bug it is a fundamental assumption that is very wrong.

You are correct; information asymmetry is one big driver of people making "non-rational" choices.

I see it as an unstable economic model; it will either devolve to capitalism with monopolies capturing most if not all sectors; or devolve into communism with a single state-like entity controlling everything. At which point; no matter which way it went; it will collapse under its own weight.

The way it swings will depend on the people who are there at the start.

The modern version of libertarianism that we see most of; is based off some really bad assumptions:

• (1) the market is perfect
• (2) barriers to entry are irrelevant
• (3) monopoly is not bad
• (4) humans are rational actors
• (5) if the market can't address the issue, it is irrelevant

(1) The market is perfect:
This leads to the assumption that all regulation is bad; and that it merely works to reduce personal freedoms and the ability of the market to produce things in the most efficient way possible.

It completely ignores history and the reason regulatory bodies were created. It also ignores that the market is not a thing unto itself; but is composed of people (see 4).

(2) Barriers to entry are irrelevant:
This follows directly from (1); even the simplest business has some barrier to entry. You have to buy somethings that your business needs to run. These are real costs, and will provide a barrier. Obviously, the bigger the barrier then more entrenched players have an advantage (see 3)

(3) Monopoly is not bad:
This is a subtle acknowledgment that (1 & 2) are completely false. Basically it is a cope, that even if monopolies form; clearly this is the market producing the most efficient production framework.

This ignores history; the major monopolies that were broken up. The crazy shit that went on to protect their monopoly status.

(4) Humans are rational actors:
Most economic models assume that consumers will make rational choices; they will make the most economically rational choices. Libertarians (in my experience) love this.

This ignores so much of reality; it also assumes that the values of all are the same as their own.

There is really too much in this point to cover here. So many things that we actually do make no sense if you were a rational actor, such as brand loyalty.

(5) If the market can't address the issue, it is irrelevant:
There are many things that the market cannot address; but in the libertarian model these things are ignored.

e.g. fire fighting; this is the classic example where a market solution didn't work.

But equally; policing; education; major infrastructure; functional health systems. There are so many examples; where if left to a purely market solution, simply would not get done.

Kurzgesagt covered it nicely.

I don't believe you, that sounds irrational!