Your feed should contain a chronological list of posts made by people you subscribe to

Should that be the only way the feed should be organised by law?

This is it. We regulate drugs, so likewise the addictive algorithm needs regulation, but no lawmakers want to go after the oligarchs.

It's a vaguely similar situation to immigration. If the US really wanted to stop illegal immigration they could take care of the vast majority of it immediately with harsh penalties for any employer caught with illegal employees, but no one wants to actually keep immigrants out because that would be admitting to the fact that they're crucial to the economy.

This is the solution in my home... Seems to work pretty well..

Have you read ministry for the future

I'll reply to this random one with that statement. There's no winning move as a parent.

Problem is being locked out. If your kid is the only one not on social media and all other kids are, your kid will be socially left out.

All kids are on a chat platform you don't support. What do you? Disallow it and give them a social handicap that might scar them, or allow it and take the risk?

The same goes for allowing images on other platforms. Since GDPR schools seem to care. Yet if it's a recording that will be put on social media you can explain your 4 year old why they weren't allowed to participate... It sucks.

I don't know what the right way forward is. I don't think this is it. Something is needed though. We should at least signal what we find acceptable as a society. Bog stupid rules which are trivial to circumvent might be good enough, or perhaps some add campaigns like we did with smoking (hehe, if it's for something we support then adds are good?).

Regardless, the current situation clearly doesn't work. It would be great if we could find and promote the least invasive solutions.

This doesn't solve the problem at the core of social media. The inevitable comparison of fake lives on impressionable children/teens has been shown to cause depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideations. There is nothing that can be done algorithm or advertising wise that would stop that from happening.

If you do the 1st one, then most companies likely wouldn't bother with such algorithms anymore.

consider though - politicians nowadays don't think. they think so little, in fact, that the last time i checked websites for self harm/sexual assault support or reporting were considered "too adult" for kids to have access to in the UK

if it was about kids' safety, this wouldn't have been omitted

Thats true for social media, but social media isn't the only time you want to do age verification.

If you want to see porn or order (legal 😇) drugs for delivery.

And this is just times where the way to "protect kids" is age verification online. There are other times where you want to protect kids too, but doing so is invasive.

exactly. im just spitballing but there should be a kid only Neocities website or something that is anonymous with pre-selected prompts you can send to other kids, no DMs or personal pictures allowed. kids and teenagers on instagram/tiktok is like kids of the early 1900s smoking a pack a day. and of course active parenting limiting how much time they spend online. as a kid in the 2000s, our bare bones sites was enough to let us feel involved with the world and still use the internet safely.

Most people don't want social media to be anonymous. They want to be themselves and connect with real people. How exactly is an anonymous tinder supposed to work?

That's the tack I'm taking. My eldest goes to high school next year and most of his peers are automatically getting a smartphone at that point. He'll be 13. He can forget it. A dumb phone at a push, for safety. That's it.

I agree, if you limit "phones" to "smart phones and portable computers". There are reasons to give a kid a small, no internet dumbphone. But yes, don't give kids unrestricted access to the family PC, and DEFINITELY dont give them their own.

And or old school phones, that can call and text, but not surf the internet. Old smaller flip phones. Because parents will want to be able to communicate because they are worriers in many cases, there is no need for them to use smartphones for this.

Except when you went outside back then, or to school, you couldn't take the TV with you. And parents controlled the TV at home

Mandatory? So Lemmy/Piefed should be forced to only list by /new/?

Chronology is only one part of this, although I think it is the right foot forward.
We also need:

• Mandatory session limits with friction
• Notification redesign replacing real-time alerts with scheduled digest batches
• Engagement friction mechanisms
• Especially need algorithmic transparency & control to make the user aware and in not manipulated
• Behavioral feedback systems
• An most importantly Monetization Realignment

The parents point is true, but more generally I think it needs to be that "people" need to be held responsible and accountable for their actions both as adults and children, and to enable this they need to be taught critical thinking skills as well as given the tools to make this happen. Common sense isn't common, it's instilled.

Funny seeing this comment on a social media platform

They *will* get around it. It's better to actually talk to them

Kids these days have access to the internet way too early. When I wanted to use the internet up until 14 I could either go buy my own computer (with what job lol) or I could use the family computer in the living room. Now 11 year olds are shit posting to 18+ subreddits it's disgusting. And it's all the parents fault. No govt regulation will fix this, you have to discipline your kids!

It is by nature very different from television. Television is purely entertainment, and is one sided. It's also only available when you are at home in front of a TV.

Social media is two way, you engage with it directly. You are now comparing yourself to the perceived lives of those around you. For most adults, this is fine. It had proven to have a very negative impact on developing children/teens, especially young girls. Not to mention it is now always with you, always in your pocket. You have access to it 24/7, which is nothing like TV.

TV has been around for a century and has not shown massive negative consequences on mental health. Social media and smart phones has been around for ~15 years and has ruined a generation. It is definitely not just the television replacement

Maybe sidestep this by asking more questions.

Why do kids use social media? What do they get from it? What could it be replaced by that's positive? What is social media?

That sort of thing.

Sounds like an opportunity to create something like that. Any devs around here up for it?

Capitalism. Everything you described costs money to create and maintain and it generates zero (or negative) profit. Most people aren't going to want to pay for some sort of nanny toolkit.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you and it should be like that. Our current systems are not going to bring that about though.