a system for stricter content moderation, especially something that would automatically delete NSFW/NSFL posts,
no direct messaging,
some kind of tool for moderators to efficiently review content,
multi-layered access to an account to allow for parental control,
time management tool that would not be based on the client, but with the session duration calculated through interactions.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] gustofwind@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I’m not sure any of those things require social media services

Especially when irl social media services for kids mostly result in interpersonal abuses and right wing fomentation (look into the discord child sex abuse and terrorism problems)

Open access to quality information does not need to be intertwined with public social media and everything we’re seeing technology do to children is harmful

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

We're seeing technology do a lot of great things for kids. We're seeing puberty blockers and vaccines save lives. We're seeing kids with no adults they can trust find community on the internet. We're seeing kids spread a message of hope and resilience and care for the environment across the world. We're seeing renewable energy heat their homes and feed them. We're seeing electric wheelchairs gives kids with no legs mobility. We're seeing assistive speech devices give kids with auditory deficits a voice. We're using cochlear implants and eyeglasses to let kids see and hear.

Technology is so great for kids. I would not want to raise a child without modern technology. Hell, without modern antibiotics and disinfectants and vaccines, it's even odds they die before their first birthday.

[–] gustofwind@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I should have been more specific but I meant social media connectivity technologies

We don’t need public social media for kids for any of those other things

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Ah, well... No. I can understand how that opinion makes sense from a cishet perspective, but the internet has been a game changer for queer people. You do not want a generation of kids in conservative areas having nobody to talk to.

And when it comes to otherkin and plural kids, forget it. Social media bans are already scarring people and reifying traumas. We have a soaring rate of youth suicidality here in Australia https://www.suicidepreventionaust.org/reckless-haste-rushed-legislation-on-social-media-ban-risks-harm-to-young-australians/

[–] gustofwind@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I’m not cishet but your problem is not social media bans its the already existent homophobic violence present in society

Enabling private communications and making true knowledge available through technology are not the same things as just letting kids post things to the public internet via systems literally invented and designed to be addictive and profit off social harm

Edit; the best analogy I’ve seen is it’s like selling kids open source range free cigarettes. Cigarettes are simply bad and almost all social media is too and it’s even worse for children

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 1 points 5 days ago

Nobody can solve homophobia overnight but people can make safe communities for queer kids on the internet. And that's a good thing. We need to look after the next generation. We need to show up for them if their parents won't.

The AIDS crisis caused a generation of queer people to grow up without their community elders. We're still feeling the ramifications of that in the community. I don't want a repeat of that. The kids need online role models.