This week (at the latest at the beginning of next week), there will be a several-hour technical break. A banner with detailed information about this will appear 24 hours before the planned work....
I normally hate turning to Youtube when there's a text resource available, but I've definitely found there are some situations where explaining a trick or a location in text is massively harder than just watching someone do it in a video.
At one point in time I illustrated my own version, I think I made it to like 20 plates out of 26 or so.
I had to stop working on the project while 'out' at like work or cafes, because people would snoop over my shoulder and then assume that I'm a fucking psycho. When I started the project, I had assumed that it was a relatively common and well-known little picturebook. Turns out no.
She gets social security, and we don’t have a lot of money ourselves and are no longer able to be with her 24/7. We are in Maryland, and are scared of what we can do. Will her medicare do anything? Is it too late for something like long term care insurance? We have no idea where to start....
There's no law that allows killing of the unwilling; even a living will addressing assisted suicide or euthanization due to incapability assumes that you would still consent at the later date, but lack either physical or intellectual ability to communicate that. If you can clearly communicate that you've changed your mind, they have to respect that, even if that changed mind has reduced capability due to dementia.
Your best hope would be to go with assisted suicide while you still have enough faculties to make the decision and execute on your portions of the act.
I'm always so torn on him; he makes interesting videos about compelling topics that are reasonably well researched ... but as nitpicky as it is, I cannot deal with his accent for very long. I'm completely willing to believe it's actually genuine, but it sounds like an American doing a bad impression of a posh British lordling.
Also, on the subject of this song being “breakout/viral” - how hard is it to manipulate streaming numbers?
It's seemed like the numbers there are 'semi-'manipulated in the way that Kpop can be - hugely inflated by deliberate rewatching and multi-platform streaming, but by individuals who genuinely want the song to do well, rather than bots or purchased fake stats.
It's really seemed like 'the right' sees Oliver Anthony as "their guy" and rallied behind him and his song in order to push it up the charts as an imagined way of 'owning the libs' - and I think OA's industry backing worked hard to seed that narrative among those circles in order to elicit that sort of boosterism from them.
There's the necessary info, thank you! - I've heard horror stories about hosting exit nodes, and was immediately spooked this would result in the same issues.
I really enjoyed some darker content in terms of establishing that humans aren't always the good, wise, enlightened people of the galaxy, consistently The Good Guys in nearly every encounter.
But shifting to that "oh there's a dark side to all the optimism" as the consistent ongoing tone for the show rings wrong as much as the always good guys tone did with older trek.
For a more values-based interpretation - players have to keep the ball 'in play' in a way that the other team can interact with, without posing a danger to the player(s) on your team.
As in this case the play is either unstoppable, or requires the other team to somehow extract the ball from between two players' chests, it's a fun theoretical loophole - but is not a fun or safe way of playing football if it became a commonplace strategy. In most cases, this would be seen as daring dangerous play - either the other team needs to kick it free, or jostle the players until they drop the ball, both of which are taking pretty significant risks of injury.
Yeah, I had to un-quit Whatsapp when my siblings-in-law moved to Argentina - because Whatsapp is the main communication platform for a lot of Argentina and that's where all the various family chats moved to once the in-laws no longer had local phone numbers or reliable SMS service.
As residents of B.C.'s Shuswap region work desperately to protect their homes, government officials are urging them to stop seizing equipment intended for provincial firefighting crews....
Could kind of see how someone facing down an impending roaring wildfire, then stealing from the same people they want help from, might be counterproductive. The people telling them not to steal fire equipment are there. They're the ones fighting the fire.
No private resident needs that equipment "to save their own life". They're on evacuation order, there are safe routes out, they should not be there, and they chose to stay in order to protect their property. The bridge that sprinklers are getting stolen from, for instance, is protected so there will be a safe passage out of the area consistently even if the fire shifts in that direction.
This is about wealth - not health. Stealing that equipment is choosing to fuck over the entire region and everyone else who needs fire protection, just to better preserve their own home, is selfish and stupid.
Yeah, I certainly hope so. Mailbox is perma-busted. I saw the notification number change when a new reply came in, but had to check for replies 'manually' in order to figure out where someone responded.
It seems like this may be linked to getting a reply on a post that was deleted, as none of the comments in that post are accessible anymore; did you reply to something that was deleted later, around the time your mailbox broke?
Not "500" - it's labelled as an "Error 50x" and returns the downtime page prior to the server upgrade;
I've had kbin error while posting a few times, but that was back prior to the server upgrade when accounts were logging back out every five to fifteen minutes - this is generating the same error page as then, but is a new problem leading to it.
Thank you! I wasn't sure it's appropriate to ping ernest - or what the approved bug reporting mechanism was here.
It may be worth linking to this thread? I think that whatever is going on with the sort-of-deleted-post there is what's causing the inbox errors.
And thanks!, re the username. It was my handle on Reddit, too, snagged when only like two books in the series were out. At the time it was a couple niche fantasy novels and he was a side character that only appeared briefly in the first book, whose name sounded cool when said out loud. ...Now that the whole series is out, wildly popular, and the character played a massive role, I feel like the kid who picked "superman" as his super-original internet username.
Yeah there's two 'main' kinds of people who want a platform where users are able to post hate speech and reach "everyone" with it.
People who want to be hateful and want access to the targets of their hate. They want to upset people, they want to 'own the libs' or be able to toss slurs at minorities, and those things are unrewarding for them if they don't get to see how upset they've made their targets.
People who want to recruit people to being hateful. They want to convince normal people to share their prejudices and their biases, they want "debates" or would like to share "statistics" and are seeking a soapbox that can reach people who might find their views convincing.
This is a huge part of why defederation works, why platforms like Voat or Gab rarely thrive for very long. Being hateful in an echo chamber towards people who are outside the room is rarely fun for those folks, and very often results in in-fighting and fragmenting of the movement. Moderates and 'normies' are driven off because now they're a target rather than a participant or spectator.
I remember the G4 with great fondness; my dad's G4 was what I did homework and gamed on as a highschooler, and then when he retired it I brought it to college and it served as our living room 'jukebox' for another five years.
Edit: if you’re downvoting me without a rebuttal, you’re part of the problem that I’m referring to – a complete dismissal of dissenting opinion on the war. If you disagree with what I’ve said, please comment why
People on the internet don't owe you a debate.
Especially when the prompt is a somewhat sanctimonious effort-dump sealioning "we should let Russia have Ukraine" as if its a reasonable liberal imperative, all in response to a stupid one-liner.
In the past week and a half, I've noticed Reddit behaviors starting to try and poison all of the places that people are taking refuge in to get away from the toxicity, myself included. They've started to DDoS Lemmy for a while, which is a Reddit thing to do and what they're notorious of doing whenever they feel they don't like...
The idea that Reddit is staging some nefarious conspiracy to "poison" fediverse spaces ... is losing the whole plot.
OP's straight up writing fanfiction trying to cast a site they just left as villains in some swashbuckling coming-of-age story. It's a nine-hour-old account, and they're already embracing the Us vs Them mentality and trying to sell it with prose.
I don't know how OP managed to pick fights within a couple hours of signing up for their account, but I'd suggest that if they left Reddit for "toxicity" only to immediately find it here too ... maybe they're carrying it around with them?
I criticized you for jumping to conclusions and fabricating narrative to support them. And apparently you got so offended by the criticism that ... you went and did it all over again, targeting me, committing even harder to the bit.
You just wrote a bunch of wild fanfiction about me and then tried to have an argument with that imaginary version of me. Might as well just yell at ghosts in the shower if you're that desperate to feel like you've snatched some petty victory from the jaws of self-inflicted defeat that is this thread.
You're the problem with your own experience.
This response is hugely excessive for the "provocation" and yet I'm sure you'll storm off imagining that I'm the big meanie here and you were some completely reasonable and utterly justified saint of good behaviour - for absolutely going off on someone who gently mocked your very serious demands for everyone to be nicer to you and meaner to the people you dislike. And you've done that to everyone who wasn't fawningly positive towards you in this thread - that you started by being hateful and childish towards a site you just left and the userbase of the site you just joined.
Even with the tiny sample size I can see why you have so many encounters with "toxic" people. You antagonize and attack people, then pretend they were the toxic ones if they defend themselves.
It's not hard to miss that you've just happened to call me all of the things that other people have told you about yourself in this thread. Hell, this whole little speech would have been far more appropriate as something someone said to you, if they were trying to hurt your feelings; so given how off the mark it was when directed at me, it's easy to wonder if maybe you're projecting a little here.
very insidious and shitty. once i started taking advantage of the hide feature it legitimately improved my mental health – which sounds addict and bad but honestly i used to get riled up at certain posts or topics and now i could just hide them with a click...
Honestly, I take the opposite view - to me that's one of the best changes they've made in ages and I'm glad it propagated to old.reddit as well as showing up in new reddit; it's been an occasional frustration to hit 'hide' by mistake on something I wanted to see, then need to navigate to the far corners of the profile just to un-hide it again was always extra-silly. Next up maybe they can turn off auto-hide when reporting a post.
This would make excellent satire, but it's pretty dismal journalism.
Ever since that day, I’ve consistently correlated success with the fluctuating number in my follower count. In fact, I would argue that every millennial who works on the internet has internalized the belief that resonance on Twitter is the only way to unlock progressively more illustrious opportunities—it somehow seems more relevant than your degree, your scoops, and even your endorsements.
Speak for yourself, please.
Many millennials who 'work on the internet' have understood in the past that Twitter follower counts did constitute a sort of abstracted measure of relevance, like pop culture equivalent of how often an academic article is cited by other academics. There was quite a while where that was, unfortunately, true: for example, your measure as a PR professional was tied to your ability to use your professional skills to boost your personal accounts. It was far from the only thing that counted, but it was certainly an excellent networking tool and having impressive high scores would result in more opportunities, better opportunities, and less hunting for them. There absolutely was an expectation that communications or marketing people would leverage their skills for their accounts, that they would show off what they could do for potential employers within the confines of their own internet footprint.
You could still get work without that, I still got work without that - but work would come to you if you had an impressive social portfolio, not just on raw follower counts but on things like content and engagement as well. The total sum of your social media and online presence was the portfolio of communications or media field, same way designers are asked to provide examples of past work.
And that's still true - it's just less and less likely to include someone's twitter in that assessment.
I think that’s why Elon’s reign of terror has been so bitterly ironic: Everything we’ve been taught about Twitter—and, frankly, social media in general—has proven to be an enormous lie. It was always volatile, and regrettably, we made it the locus of our careers.
Things can be true in the past and false in the present. What this particular person was taught in the past was true at the time of teaching. And then this crazy thing called "change" occurred and it's no longer true. Except, what he was taught - that conventional wisdom holds that journalists need their own personal brands - remains true. The secondary coaching, that a Twitter presence is part of that branding, is not necessarily true but also not abstractly false either.
That the author struggles with the very concept of change, feels they were promised that Twitter would be permanent, and seems to believe that people who are successful now because of twitter activity then are somehow going to wind up on the streets is hilarious, if perhaps in a not particularly kind way.
Everyone he talked to has a secure career or market position. Sure, they got there via twitter, or they feel twitter helped them achieve that - but they will be fine. Some of them might take earnings hits or need to make some uncomfortable pivots to off-twitter platforms, but none of those folks are teetering on the edge of a cardboard mansion lifestyle after sinking clearly-fruitless hours into twitter boosterism.
Lorenz predicts something of a “Great Clout Reset” on the horizon—everyone emerging from the rubble, starting over at square one—and frankly, she can’t wait to see what happens. [...] Maybe that’s the silver lining. Twitter might be dying, but maybe afterwards, we can try to become superstars all over again.
Oh look, we can see how the author wound up thinking that Twitter was all-important and utterly permanent. They're doing it all over again; and in ten years we'll get the exact same article about whatever platform they think is actually the Real Deal right now, complaining about how it inevitably failed and Lorenz steered them wrong with bad career tips.
Whole lot of people here have cut off other people, but no one's yet shared a story about what got them cut off. This one's mine.
I was unceremoniously removed from The List by a group of folks I was close with for years, after clashing with a couple of new additions to the group for a few months. We collectively ran a bit of a sketchy party scene and had been hosting stuff out of the weird end of town for a year or two when it all blew up - we weren't quite on the scale of underground warehouse raves, but we were like the training-wheels version. We'd get a lead on a place that was slated to be vacant for a month or a commercial building gone dark, arrange a couple bands and an escape plan, and pull a couple hundred bucks each in entry charge and dodgy beer.
They were great friends in addition to being sort-of in business together, and we had some absolutely great times.
Except one couple who'd been with us from the start and were OG team members met a new crowd of people. They wanted to bring their friends, we said sure, and ... shit started going downhill. The couple weren't bad. Their friends weren't bad. Their friends' friends were awful. I didn't like the new crowd's vibe, I didn't like who they were bringing in, what they were up to, and I didn't get along with the initial connections in the slightest. I thought they were assholes, they thought I was an asshole, and in hindsight we were both correct.
As much as each new member of our little scene was more money at the end of an event, I didn't want them there. I spent a lot of time and everyone's patience arguing why I felt these specific new people needed to be shown a door and firmly told to be on the other side of it, and I definitely went out of my way to cut them out of anything I had control over. My friends were frustrated, I was frustrated, and everyone was on edge - I was convinced these people were going absolutely ruin what we'd built, my friends were frustrated I wouldn't drop the grudge and didn't see the problem I was focused on.
In my defense, the new people were bringing in their crowd, and their crowd was bad news. It was like they were the scene where all the people other parties didn't want wound up congregating. There was the sketchy "why are you here?" old dudes, there were the people who did too much of many drugs even for our standards, there was the massive collection of edgy at-risk middleschoolers, there were the aggro bros and the dealers with Connections ... to me, inviting those people in the door was a massive heat score and absolutely ruining the vibe for the kind of people we wanted to attract. That said, in my friends' defense - we had agreed we'd make decisions as a team, and I was outvoted but unwilling to let it go; and we didn't have a problem with drugs or kids or even weird old dudes in general - half of us started in that community young and most absolutely dabbled in chemicals. We all were those kids a few years prior. My concerns read as hypocritical or gatekeep-y, rather than genuine, because I'd never been concerned about that shit prior.
The last straw? I paid a guy I knew from the other side of town to drive his dad's charger slowly past our venue a couple times, for several different events, so that people thought we might be about to get raided. Because the people I didn't care for were pretty dodgy, they fucked off at the faintest hint of trouble.
The other people in our crew found out, and I was excised from that group.
In hindsight, we were both right. I was petty and sabotaged the group to get my way - and those new people did absolutely ruin shit for that scene within a couple years. I've connected individually with a few members of that group over the many years since, but am very formally persona non grata at shit they do as a group - I don't think any of the people I still talk to even admit to the rest that they see me sometimes.
I don't want this to read like I was booted for taking some moral highground. I absolutely wasn't. I took the low road and went behind my friends' backs to undermine what we were doing, all because I wanted a specific group of people gone from our scene. As much as an adult's perspective would make it easy to spin this as if I had moral objections to bringing hard drugs and hard druggies and middleschoolers into the same place for underground parties - I wasn't concerned about those things, morally. Having middleschoolers get wasted at parties wasn't a problem to me, or even having creepy dudes trying to pick them up, or people shooting hard shit in the living room ... I just didn't like how there was more of "them" than "us" and our events were slowly becoming that scene, instead of just having a little bit of it off in one corner.
I sympathize with the modern games critic. There are many of them out there doing great, thoughtful work. They’ve got things to say. And the broad response from gamers, at best, is “we don’t care.” Or at worst, “shut the fuck up.” Of course there are people who like their work, but my feeling is that is a tiny niche....
I feel like there is space for talking about games besides actually playing them, similar to sports.
To refine further, I think there exists demand for a "middle ground" of games discourse that is talking about games as a whole, or as entries into their genre, in detail and with consideration - but without being a hyper-focused discussion of one specific game by it's die-hards. We have both poles - there is lots of relatively superficial discussion of games, or game reviews, that aren't giving a particularly detailed discussion of each game ... and there's lots of posts in a specific games' space with ultra-specific and supremely detailed discourse from a highly-invested players' perspective.
But there's not been a successful venue or single leading voice that's really filling that niche. TB did for ages, and I don't think anyone has come close to filling those shoes since.
I personally want the kind of insights that come from putting a week into a game and playing a lot of other similar games, but not necessarily being a hardcore fan or hater of the game or the genre. Like, I'll get a week into a game and start noticing that the core gameplay is good, but the economy seems off, or that gunplay is just a little jank when playing near obstacles - deeper than "better/worse than GAME1, while slower not as twitchy as COMPETITOR".
In similar sense, talking about games as a media and as offering within a media landscape - in that sense you talk about asking "what is fun"; looking at game systems and mechanics from a lens of media critique and systems design. How does this work, how do competitors solve this problem, what other problems does it introduce - how does the sum picture mesh and how cohesive is the end product.
You know those sci-fi teleporters like in Star Trek where you disappear from one location then instantaneously reappear in another location? Do you trust that they are safe to use?...
Thing is, the idea that an "old you" has "died" is a modern soul conceit. If "me" is just the combination of meat, electricity, and memories - then for all intents and purposes I was simply taken apart in one place and reassembled in another. Continuity of all three is maintained when I am reassembled on Mars with my body and memories intact. There is no "old" and "new" me - because what you or OP think defines "me" isn't something that dies when the meat stops working briefly.
or in a real teleport where you are disassembled, you're gone the moment
I love how this was said completely unironically.
We're talking about something that only exists in sci-fi stories and you're trying to argue about souls as if one outcome of teleports is clearly more real than another.
you're gone the moment you teleport and the "you" that remains is another different person with exactly your thoughts, feelings, motivations, memories, etc
Ship of Thesius, though. If it's exactly my thoughts, exactly my feelings, exactly my motivations, my memories, my body ... That's me. There's no other parts that got left out.
But consciousness was interrupted briefly when the transport happened? That happens to me every night - except in the morning I wake up in the same place instead of a different one. For all worthwhile intents and purposes, everything tangible and real that makes a person a person is relocated and the person remains. Getting lost in whether or not "you" "survive" is wasting angst on the existence of a soul.
Your mind is a process running in a body created from that file.
When the process stops, you are effectively dead. Another copy of your body runs another process with an identical content. He has your body, but he’s not you.
This presumes that there is something special in this model that doesn't resume when your mind resumes running in it's new location. Or, in other terms, "a soul". The idea that an identical consciousness in an identical body is "not you" is based wholly on the assumption that "you" is something other than the consciousness.
And your mind, or my mind, are both "processes" that stop regularly already - are you claiming that old you dies each night and a completely new but otherwise identical person lives each morning?
This presumes that there is something special in this model that doesn’t resume when your mind resumes running in it’s new location. Or, in other terms, “a soul”.
That is ridiculous.
So you do see my point.
People aren't computers, so getting all worked up about how software models instances still isn't a valid modelling for human consciousness.
When you kill a process and you re-run a program, even if you saved the full state of the memory elsewhere, you don’t say that it’s the same process. Is another process with identical content. There’s no need of a metaphysical entity. It’s another instance.
But this is so hair-splittingly pedantic it's almost doubled back to be incorrect. If you ask 99.999% of the world, they'll be like "yeah I closed outlook and then I opened outlook" - to them, it's still the same program. They're launching the same software again. No one is like "oh well once you quit Skyrim it's all over because even if you reopen it later, it's a new instance and the old one is dead" ... no. That's ridiculous. It's the same program, the same save file, resumed from save at a later date.
Your focus on "Process" instead of "Program" is making the soul argument. The "process" you're arguing for is a soul. Something intangible and irrelevant to the end user, that does get terminated on shutdown, that cannot be restored from save. Consciousness is the software, not the process itself. Memories are the save file. There is nothing in OP's model of teleporting that suggests "process" itself is the sacred portion - when the hardware & software of "Dave" gets paused and resumed flawlessly.
You’re deeply, sorely mistaken. Even in a deep, unconscious state, the mind keeps working, even if the degree of consciousness is different. That we’re not 100% certain of what the brain does in those moments doesn’t mean that it stops working.
Not at all. Consciousness is interrupted. Unless we're assuming that the "process" itself is sacred - what happens to consciousness is all that matters in either case. If your ability to perceive yourself as a conscious being stops - it doesn't matter to your experience of your own consciousness if the 'process' stopped or went to sleep during the gap.
To me it has nothing to do with souls, it's about continuity of experience. [...] If I don't get to continue to experience life because I'm dead and some clone with my exact thoughts etc is now me, it's only the rest of the world who experiences that as me continuing to live. But I don't get to.
I think that distinction is artificial.
My continuity of experience is interrupted every night, among others - and I don't worry that my experience as being me is somehow invalid now, or fear sleeping lest a doppelganger take my body overnight and wake up 'as me' the next morning. The idea that this would be different is resting on the notion that there is something other than mere meat and electricity that would be lost when the teleport interrupts consciousness, and I think that assumption is something that needs direct challenge.
I think you would experience life continuing from the moment consciousness resumes in the new location, the exact same as how you experience life 'continuing' when you wake up each day. All the ways that you experience your own consciousness would simply have relocated. Without assuming a soul, there is no subjective distinction between pre/post teleporter any more than there's a distinction between pre/post nap.
Yeah, there's your problem. You're trying to make me understand it your way and criticizing me for not doing so, instead of trying to persuasively state your own viewpoints standing on their own.
It's an approach that I can imagine would feel frustrating when I already understand your views and am talking about them.
If you are in fact a doppelganger you have no way of knowing and neither does the Anomander who died. And that is why I wouldn't risk teleportation.
Which, conversely, is also why I don't care about teleportation. If I have no idea before and I have no idea after and for all intents and purposes I am still me in the new location ... all the parts that I can engage with, all the parts I care about - they're all coming up fine. I might as well have fallen asleep on a plane, or blacked out after a few too many at the pub. When consciousness returns, I am in a new location.
In that explanation you quoted, I fall firmly into the former camp. I don't think we have special-ness that transcends the meat, but that the consciousness is wholly rooted in it - and so I think that moving the meat from one place to another achieves the result of moving the consciousness from one place to another.
My main difference is that I don't believe a "soul" transported or transplanted - or exists to be lost. The consciousness that is my sense of 'self' is the sum of my meat and my memories, and those are preserved.
This is entirely the fault of the IWF and Microsoft, who create "exclusive" proprietary CSAM prevention software and then only license big tech companies to use it.
Putting the blame on Microsoft or IWF is meaningfully missing the point.
People were responsible for moderating what showed up on their forums or servers for years prior to these tools' existence, people have been doing the same since those tools existed. Neither the tool nor it's absence are responsible for child porn getting posted to Fediverse instances. If those shards won't take action against CSAM materials now - what good will the tool do? We can't run it here and have the tool go delete content from someone elses' box.
While those tools would make some enforcement significantly easier, the fact that enforcement isn't meaningfully occurring on all instances isn't something we can point at Microsoft and claim is their fault somehow.
I think there were a lot of players up and down the ranks waiting to see which way the wind blew before casting for any given side.
With so many concerns that the coup had backing from either Putin or other power blocs, a whole lot of side players would have wanted to back a winning pony and were waiting on early outcomes. Equally, with Putin not providing decisive action, I'm sure that invited meaningful concerns that this was some sort of double-dealing or the beginning of a Putin-backed purge.
The token has been controversial in Silicon Valley for its ambitious and unorthodox approach to trying to solve two vexing problems: Online identity authentication and income inequality....
If this coin's math and mechanics actually work in transferring wealth from rich to poor ... it'll be swamped in poor people wanting their cut, and rich people will want nothing to do with a shitcoin that's explicitly going to take their money and give it to other people.
The nation’s second-largest teachers union said Thursday it was losing patience with social media apps that it says are contributing to mental health problems and misbehavior in classrooms nationwide, draining time and money from teachers and school systems.
I think that this is like wrapping a kid in bubble-wrap, though. And like, not in that "over-coddling" metaphorical sense, but much more literal - sure, the kid can't get scrapes if they fall off their bike, but the other kids are going to make fun of the kid wearing bubble wrap.
You don't necessarily want to give them an unrestricted mainline to the worst of the internet, but you don't want to overcorrect so hard that you're causing other problems.
As toxic as it is, as much as there's space for harms and bullying, or that the internet holds porn and violent content ... the internet and social media spaces are where a huge portion of kids social lives live, and barring them from participating in that will do one of two things - teach them to get sneaky in order to bypass the restriction, or force them into an 'outsider' role in their peer group. In the first, it's a lost cause and all you're doing is making it inconvenient without addressing the harms - and ensuring they can't talk to you about what comes from that space. In the latter, there are strong social and self-esteem costs associated with excluding your child from having a social life with other children - is it "better" for the parent to do the harm instead of the other children? Is it better for your relationship with that child, long-term, their trust in you, or your ability to support them?
The kid restricted to "dumb phone only, no internet, no apps" is the current generations' equivalent of that one kid that wasn't allowed to go to the park, or the mall, or hang out on the street - whatever any given past generation used as their youthful Third Place, where they could socialize and hang out separate from school and without adults actively supervising them. And it's never been great for the kid whose parents won't let them participate in the common social life that their peers have.
It's far more fruitful to give them age-appropriate education related to their use of and relationship with the internet and provide a controlled and supported introduction than it is to simply bar their access for several years. You're either stunting their social development in order to avoid harms to their social development (?!?!) or you're simply winding the proverbial rubber band tighter and tighter against an inevitable rebellion - at which point they're jumping in headlong without ever developing any sort of media literacy or social media savvy and never had a chance to build coping and resilience for whatever rabbit holes they're likely to fall into .
My comment was clearly not written to give you advice for your specific child and her suite of issues.
I'm speaking a lot more generally and while I'm leaving room for parents like you to make your choices, I'm also still being direct that I think it's not a good universal rule. Even if that is an outcome someone chooses, it's no less true that engaging with the whole choice is necessary to do a good job of making it. Internet=bad is an incredibly simplistic old-person take at this stage in society, and some parents even to current generations can misunderstand or underestimate the significant role that the internet can play in their kids' lives. No solution fits across all kids, that's part of the challenge - but understanding the role that the internet plays in modern kids' social world and peer networks is important to making decisions about their access to it with complete information and goal-oriented integrity.
The matched point in that comment you may have missed is that I'm not modelling my remarks around a binary of "unrestricted internet" vs "no internet." If anything, I think I was clearly saying that absolute 'solutions' get progressively worse the wider they cast their net - as more and more unintended consequences are included in that broad-reaching choice.
Separately, you also shouldn't expect that what you felt you needed to do in order to support your child in a relatively unusual situation - will also be a good foundation for broad-case parenting practices. What is good for one child is not good for all children - and the more unusual the child or their needs, the less applicable that solution would be to "average" kids. There are other kids in similar-looking situations where your solution would exacerbate the problem instead of reduce it - now not only are they depressed and bullied, but also isolated from their friends. The vast majority of kids aren't in situations particularly similar to yours and using your solution in their cases risks putting them into worse places than they started, or putting a target on them where none existed prior. Sever the child from the internet isn't something you necessarily should be treating as universally good for all parents and all kids with zero possible downsides.
There are always downsides. Especially in parenting, everything is a trade-off and nothing is clear-cut. If you can't see what's being traded off - in effectively anything - that's a good cue to start hunting for blind spots. Especially when making rules for kids like cutting off parts of their world. As you said, being a parent requires making tough choices, and that requires engaging with the whole cost/benefit of the choice.
There's nothing challenging or tough about firmly believing you are wholly, completely, and absolutely Correct in whatever option you pick. It's easy to choose something and insist that it's 100% totally and absolutely correct with zero room for discussion. That approach actively shuts down all the actually hard parts of making the choice. But that is a choice with it's own downsides. It makes it hard to relate to those kids as they age enough to challenge you, or start leaving home, and it doesn't model behavior that I - personally - think is producing functional adults down the road. At the very least, the kind of person who is never wrong is not the kind of person I want to raise.
So I think that commenting more specifically on what you've said here - it rings some bells and tints some flags. You're proudly teaching your kids critical thinking, yet also say you cannot see any downsides to cutting off social media completely. You're absolutely blase about deeming all kids who use social media "toxic" and "bad friends" with "struggles" as if it's completely normal, healthy, and definitely non-toxic for an adult to be passing those kind of judgements about children on such a trivial basis, and to model that for their own kids. You talk about one child's needs to justify the choice, but have more than that one affected by it. You reacted as if this is already a hot-button issue to you - and responded to remarks clearly speaking generally and not at all targeting to you as if it was a personal attack, returning fire with a bunch of spicy jibes about me as a person and as a parent. If this is how you experience and respond to an opinion you disagree with on the internet, I can certainly imagine how you deal with faintest hints of dispute from your own children. Of course they're telling you what you want to hear.
The calls are coming from inside the house, friend.
October: kbin.social planned technical outage (kbin.social)
This week (at the latest at the beginning of next week), there will be a several-hour technical break. A banner with detailed information about this will appear 24 hours before the planned work....
Game wikis just aren't as popular anymore?
Has anyone else noticed that Wikis for most games just aren’t as complete anymore?...
A is for Amy (i.imgur.com)
My mother-in-law lives with us and has been diagnosed with Alzheimers. We've been dealing with it for about a year but things are progressively getting worse. What are options for care?
She gets social security, and we don’t have a lot of money ourselves and are no longer able to be with her 24/7. We are in Maryland, and are scared of what we can do. Will her medicare do anything? Is it too late for something like long term care insurance? We have no idea where to start....
TIL about the scientist who stuck his head in an active particle accelerator and the scientist who accidentally gave himself the wrong STD (youtu.be)
Worst Science Experiments Gone Wrong...
The breakout song by an artist who goes by Oliver Anthony laid the groundwork to open the first Republican presidential debate for the 2024 election. But the song has notes of conspiracy theories. (www.npr.org)
gotdam frickin milkshake duck is undefeated
What's your snowflake stats for the day? (discuss.tchncs.de)
for those who don’t know:...
Some lessons are timeless. (lemmy.world)
pro strats (midwest.social)
what messaging app you have quit and rejoined?
I don’t think that’s happened to me yet
'You're not helping': Residents of B.C.'s Shuswap urged to stop seizing firefighting equipment (bc.ctvnews.ca)
As residents of B.C.'s Shuswap region work desperately to protect their homes, government officials are urging them to stop seizing equipment intended for provincial firefighting crews....
Messages / Notifications are unreadable - accessing page gives 50X error. (kbin.social)
I have two unread messages I can't access, as going to the notifications page results in a 50x error every time....
deleted_by_author
iMac at 25: a visual history of Apple’s iconic all-in-one computer (www.theverge.com)
"...is not supported in this browser", fuck you Discord (programming.dev)
Biden asks Congress for $40 billion to support Ukraine, replenish US disaster aid and bolster border (apnews.com)
Coffee News from July 2023 (kbin.social)
Coffee News from July 2023...
Be wary of spiteful Reddit users (kbin.social)
In the past week and a half, I've noticed Reddit behaviors starting to try and poison all of the places that people are taking refuge in to get away from the toxicity, myself included. They've started to DDoS Lemmy for a while, which is a Reddit thing to do and what they're notorious of doing whenever they feel they don't like...
This new UX change sucks ass. When I hide a post I want it *gone*. (lemmy.world)
very insidious and shitty. once i started taking advantage of the hide feature it legitimately improved my mental health – which sounds addict and bad but honestly i used to get riled up at certain posts or topics and now i could just hide them with a click...
The Unexpected, Strangely Relaxing Outcome of All This Twitter Drama (slate.com)
What did "that one" person do to you which made you cut them out of your life?
Or, alternatively, what did you do to another person which got you blacklisted from their life?
What is the role of games critique?
I sympathize with the modern games critic. There are many of them out there doing great, thoughtful work. They’ve got things to say. And the broad response from gamers, at best, is “we don’t care.” Or at worst, “shut the fuck up.” Of course there are people who like their work, but my feeling is that is a tiny niche....
Telltale is back! The Expanse: A Telltale Series launches today (ghostarchive.org)
will twitter last or will it die?
is twitter gonna die like tumblr did.?
Balkan Paradise Orchestra (i.imgur.com)
Would you use teleporter technology if it existed? Why or Why not?
You know those sci-fi teleporters like in Star Trek where you disappear from one location then instantaneously reappear in another location? Do you trust that they are safe to use?...
Microsoft and IWF Refuse To Assist In The Detection And Removal Of Child Pornography on the Fediverse (gleasonator.com)
This is entirely the fault of the IWF and Microsoft, who create "exclusive" proprietary CSAM prevention software and then only license big tech companies to use it.
Putin appeared paralyzed and unable to act in first hours of rebellion (wapo.st)
Sam Altman’s Worldcoin token to launch Monday (www.semafor.com)
The token has been controversial in Silicon Valley for its ambitious and unorthodox approach to trying to solve two vexing problems: Online identity authentication and income inequality....
2024 Preliminaries Hosts Announced — U.S. Coffee Championships (uscoffeechampionships.org)
US Coffee Champs qualifier circuit for 2024 has been announced....
A teachers union says it’s fed up with social media’s impact on students (www.nbcnews.com)
The nation’s second-largest teachers union said Thursday it was losing patience with social media apps that it says are contributing to mental health problems and misbehavior in classrooms nationwide, draining time and money from teachers and school systems.