Microsoft Joins In On The ‘Screw Over LGBTQ Kids’ Party By Supporting KOSA

from the cynical-political-moves dept

Well, this is not that much of a surprise, but in the leadup to the Senate “child safety” dog and pony show that will be happening in a few hours, Microsoft decided to twist the knife in to some of its competitors. Microsoft’s Vice Chair and President, Brad Smith (who was formerly the company’s general counsel and absolutely understands the impact of what he’s doing) came out and endorsed the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA).

Image

If you can’t read that, he says:

Technology can be a powerful tool for learning, creativity, communication, and social good, but can equally pose significant challenges and risks for young users. We must protect youth safety and privacy online and ensure that technology – including emerging technologies such as AI – serves as a positive force for the next generation.

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) provides a reasonable, impactful approach to address this issue. It is a tailored, thoughtful measure that can support young people to engage safely online. Microsoft supports this legislation, encourages its passage, and applauds Senators Blumenthal and Blackburn for their leadership.

This is absolute bullshit on multiple levels. First off, weird plug for AI there, which has nothing to do with any of this, and which is likely to be Congress’ next target of “bad” tech.

Of course, that may very well be why Smith is doing this. He knows it’s an easy way to cozy up with Congress and pretend to support their agenda, while the downside risk to Microsoft is minimal. KOSA is going to cause a pain for more consumer-facing social media sites like Instagram and YouTube, but Microsoft-owned sites like LinkedIn and GitHub are most likely to be spared. So, as a totally cynical approach, this saddles some of Microsoft’s largest competitors with a nonsense compliance headache, while letting Microsoft publicly claim it’s “protecting the kids” while getting kudos from Congress.

However the claim that KOSA is “reasonable,” “impactful,” “tailored,” or “thoughtful” is just grade-A bullshit. The law is a total mess, and will do real harm to kids beyond just being obviously unconstitutional. As we’ve pointed out multiple times, GOP support for the bill is because they know it will be used to censor LGBTQ content. The GOP’s leading “think tank,” the Heritage Foundation has publicly supported the bill because they believe censoring LGBTQ content “is protecting kids.” Meanwhile, bill co-sponsor, Marsha Blackburn (whom Smith thanks above for her “leadership,”) has similarly admitted that Congress should pass KOSA to “protect minor children from the transgender in our culture.”

There is no excuse for Microsoft to take this stance, which Smith well knows will likely lead to kids dying, rather than being protected. But, Smith is a cynical political operator and knows exactly what he’s doing. He’s doing a favor for Congress while cynically kicking his rivals while they’re down. Between this and Snap’s similar capitulation, expect to see all sorts of nonsense at the hearing about how “some companies want to protect our children, why won’t you?” addressed to the other company representatives.

Microsoft, over the last decade or so, really rehabilitated its public image as the evil company of the 90s that crushed competitors through any dirty trick imaginable. But that DNA is still in there, and it will miss no opportunity to kick competitors, even if it comes at the expense of children.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,
Companies: microsoft, snap

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Microsoft Joins In On The ‘Screw Over LGBTQ Kids’ Party By Supporting KOSA”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
192 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Been hearing that they may try to pass KOSA sometime in Spring but I still think the bill unlikely to pass before the election. Even if it passed the Senate it will still need to pass the House where it will have a harder time.

Still Snap and Microsoft backing it (and apparently Twitter/x will back it with other bad bill) this is very worrying.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Mask off

The silver lining of all these companies hopping on the KOSA bandwagon is that you can see these companies’ true attitudes toward queer people. Their facades have vanished. Microsoft, along with a bunch of other big companies, decided that their bottom line is far more important than safety and equality for queer people. This indicates that any pro-queer sentiment (or anything that condemns bigotry) coming from these companies was just pandering all along.

If any of these companies actually meaningfully care about queer people, none of them would be supporting KOSA. Lining the pockets of the filthy rich matters more to them, so instead they support throwing queer people under the bus for KOSA.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

This indicates that any pro-queer sentiment (or anything that condemns bigotry) coming from these companies was just pandering all along.

Surely you weren’t so naïve as to think that whatever-mega-corp felt any genuine fondness for some of the most disgusting, degenerate people in America today (queers & groomers)?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

only someone who’s in the closet about being queer while drowning in self-hatred would say something like that

Or maybe I just think that “queer” people and their advocates are some of the most evil, disgusting people to wield influence on vulnerable children and young people since Ibram X. Kendi.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Putting the bigotry aside: No corporation feels any genuine fondness for anything but money. If a corporation’s higher-ups believe they can get away with murder and that they’ll make more profit by killing people, that corporation will start murdering people left and right to make a buck. Just ask the U.S.-based companies that helped the Nazis in World War II.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

Corporations are run by people.

And those people typically have a responsibility to the shareholders of those corporations: a responsibility to create profit. If corporate executives have to create profit by any means necessary, and those means can include “murder”, they would commit murder to create profit more often than they wouldn’t. We don’t get executives like Satoru Iwata⁠—who cut his own salary and refused to fire workers after a rough financial year for Nintendo a decade ago⁠—on a regular basis. We get executives like David Zaslav, an enemy of the arts and culture in general.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:9

You claim you don’t respond to otherwording by responding and saying you don’t respond to otherwording. In other words, what you’re trying to do is to claim that you have a valid response but you’re withholding it. But you have no such response, because, as always, you are wrong.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:10

I don’t respond to otherwording because…well, first, let me break out my copypasta on the word:

otherwording (or in-other-wordsing) — noun

  1. Summarizing a point of argument in a way that distorts the point into saying something it does not and attributes the false interpretation to the person who raised the original point.
  2. A blatant attempt to make winning an argument easier for someone who is out of their depth in said argument.

Example: You will often find the phrases “in other words” or “so you’re saying” at the beginning of an instance of otherwording.

See also: strawman; your post

If you want me to respond to you with anything other than this and what I’ve already responded to you with, argue against the points I actually made instead of the point you wish I had made so your argument would be stronger. If and when you can do that, I’ll be glad to have a conversation. Until then: Stop shoving words down my throat that didn’t first come from it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:11

Oh, Stone, bless your heart, I don’t ever want you to respond to anything I say. But it’s fun poking and prodding at you because you’re so obviously incapable of not responding, no matter how wrong your responses will be.

For example, the film American Fiction is distributed by Amazon, and The Color Purple by Warner. And the scurrilous Harvey Weinstein was responsible for an enormous number of artistic movies.

You’re just an idiot. Corporations are run by people with the same diverse motivations as anyone else, with the same talents or lack thereof as anyone else. You, and Masnick, and Bode just cherry-pick examples that happen to hit your own prejudices and blather about them, just as I like to talk about male rapists being put into women’s prisons or migrants who attack NYPD officers being released after arrest without bail.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:12

you’re so obviously incapable of not responding

I am capable of responding. But I do my level best to respond to arguments that address what I actually said, not what someone wishes I had said so they can make some sort of “gotcha” statement or force me into defending a position that I didn’t take or an opinion I didn’t express. If you otherword me, I will refuse to respond to that otherwording more often than I will actually respond to it.

If you want an actual response, here’s what you do: Go back to where you first otherworded me, re-read what I said before you otherworded me, and address the points I actually made instead of assigning to me a position I never so much as implied was mine and asking me to defend that position. A refusal to do this, as well as any future otherwording, will be met with the same response you’ve been getting. Your misunderstanding of my capabilities notwithstanding, I’m not going to play a game that you’ve tried to rig in your favor, so address my actual positions or fuck off⁠—because I don’t respond to otherwording.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Cliff Jerrison says:

The whole idea of a bill that prohibits “harm” without a concrete definition is ridiculous. If that worked we’d only need one criminal law: it’s illegal to harm anyone.

But that won’t suffice because we apparently have a national disagreement about whether it’s harmful to tell a child know “you don’t have to act like a Real Man to be a good person, just be kind and you can look however you want and love whoever you love.”

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

But that won’t suffice because we apparently have a national disagreement about whether it’s harmful to tell a child know “you don’t have to act like a Real Man to be a good person, just be kind and you can look however you want and love whoever you love.”

Groomers should be sent to Siberia.

Cliff Jerrison says:

Re: Re:

The word “groomer” means a person who prepares a child for sexual abuse. This is such a heinous thing to do that it arouses feelings of violence in many people.

You using that word to mean “anyone who tells kids it’s okay to be different” is transparently intended to capture those feelings of violence and transpose them onto people who have absolutely no sexual intention towards children.

(I guess you think it’s unbearably sexy for a boy to wear a skirt or act gay? But that’s a you problem. Personally I don’t think children are sexy no matter how they dress or act.)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

The word “groomer” means a person who prepares a child for sexual abuse.

Which is exactly why it’s such an appropriate term to describe the evil, disgusting, Nazi-like monsters who try to convince children that they can be “born in the wrong bodies” and so need to be chemically castrated and physically mutilated.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Cliff Jerrison says:

Re: Re: Re:2

In fairness, I don’t really think you’re attracted to gender-nonconforming children. I think you’re sexually aroused by posting angry things on websites and getting a reaction. It’s a form of sadism using words to hurt (however feebly), and for some unfathomable reason you’ve decided that the TechDirt comment section is where you go to to practice that fetish. Well, happy spanking, I guess.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

As always, if you want to know whether a comment was left by me, you need to ask the site owner not to send my signed-in posts to moderation.

Unlike the person to whom you’re responding, I believe that the people who are urging that mentally ill children should be able to have themselves medically and surgically mutilated in order to emulate the sex they can never be are doing it with the best of intentions, under the false impression that they are actually helping their victims.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5

He also doesn’t know that gender reassignment surgeries for minors happen so rarely that they effectively don’t exist. Or that actual transgender healthcare is hard to access, takes years to undergo, and can now be cut short at any given moment by conservative state lawmakers deciding that transgender people no longer deserve full bodily autonomy.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

The word “groomer” means a person who prepares a child for sexual abuse.

To be fair, grooming someone can mean grooming them for something other than sexual abuse. Conservative Christians, for example, can groom children into being gullible dipshit adults who believe a book of myths written many centuries ago over actual science⁠—and thus able to believe pretty much any lie that the liar contextualizes as “godly” or “biblical”.

Anonymous Coward says:

Authoritarianism, while often good for big companies, has problems with anything that reduces the ability to control the population, and so anything to attack the Internet is good for authoritarians. They want the level of control exercised by China and Russia, and therefore a means to bypass the constitution to obtain that control, and think of the children is being used as such a bypass.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

We totes won’t use it to harm queer people!!!

Pay no attention to the new law in FL making it impossible for a transperson to update their sex on their drivers license and making it a crime to drive if your license doesn’t show your gender at birth.

I wish they would just admit that they care about white cishet kids who worship jeebus.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Pay no attention to the new law in FL making it impossible for a transperson to update their sex on their drivers license and making it a crime to drive if your license doesn’t show your gender at birth.

A driver license is an identification document and, as such, serves a critical role in assisting public and private entities in correctly establishing the identity of a person presenting the license.

Permitting an individual to alter his or her license to reflect an internal [deranged] sense of gender role or identity, which is neither immutable nor objectively verifiable, undermines the purpose of an identification record and can frustrate the State’s ability to enforce its laws. 🙏

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

I’d think it’s be more deranged to intentionally force people to use a driver’s license that clashes with how they present in their daily lives.

Mentally-ill biological males who attempt to trick the world into believing they’re women are still men–and should be treated as such (since we can’t legally lobotomize them).

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

Women have lots of reasons to be afraid of men invading their private spaces, men much less so of women. Because transwomen are mentally deranged men, they are even more threatening, especially when they are confronted by women who want them out of their spaces.

A bearded lady is a curiosity. A man in a dress is a dangerous infiltrator.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re

It’s not going to pass, People, and even though it’s not looking like it, are fighting like hell to stop this shit.
KOSA will never pass, They need to get over themselves. I still think it’s Satan’s Blackmail on the people who “want” KOSA. Maybe they don’t really want KOSA but Satan is forcing them to push for KOSA.

Anonymous Coward says:

Stop this!

Can’t people stop acting like this? I’m not religious but I think this all Satan’s work at play here. And People don’t even notice. Again, not religious but I’d like people to stop doing stuff like this. KOSA will never pass. 1st Amendment will last forever, Artificial Intelligence will be banned from being used as a weapon. Because an enemy’s weapon can turn against the enemy.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

Can’t believe I didn’t save the link, but a while back someone posted a link to a story where several congregants from a church were complaining about how being nice to other people and/or taking care of the poor had no relevance in modern life and asking where the pastor was getting such pathetic ideas, only to not even bat an eye that the pastor told them that he was quoting Jesus.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 'Jesus who?'

Thanks, you just saved me having to continue looking through old comments for the right one in the pile and hoping I didn’t miss it in the process.

Looks like that’s it, if that link wasn’t the one I was thinking of it does at least still have the quote I was thinking of.

It was the result of having multiple pastors tell me, essentially, the same story about quoting the Sermon on the Mount, parenthetically, in their preaching — “turn the other cheek” — [and] to have someone come up after to say, “Where did you get those liberal talking points?” And what was alarming to me is that in most of these scenarios, when the pastor would say, “I’m literally quoting Jesus Christ,” the response would not be, “I apologize.” The response would be, “Yes, but that doesn’t work anymore. That’s weak.” And when we get to the point where the teachings of Jesus himself are seen as subversive to us, then we’re in a crisis.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

I’m not religious but I think this all Satan’s work at play here.

I’ll ignore the obvious contradiction and say this: Satan would probably be against KOSA because Satan is anti-authoritarian. Defying and fighting God doesn’t seem like the kind of thing that would put Satan on the side of people using God to justify everything from anti-queer attitudes to refusing to pass bills that would pay for children to have lunch at school.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Ah; but the whole idea of Satan is not only that he’s anti-authoritarian, but also the master of deception, able to package up complex lies as shining truths to convince people they’re doing Good Things when those things can harm their relationship with others/god.

And from that viewpoint, this would be right up Satan’s ally. God is depicted as an authoritarian with integrity, and Satan as an anarchist with no integrity whatsoever (whatever works in the moment that 0wns the Deity).

What we currently have in Republican leadership is the worst of both camps.

Anonymous Coward says:

Went from the usual song and dance to sudden major support. I assume this has links to the cybercrime treaty which is in its final negotiating session right now and has its own hellscape of mass surveillance and turning innocents into criminals, passing kosa and its scat brethren would have america in compliance with the treaty’s demands.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Then what do you tell the Intersex[sic] people just pass the Q on that acronym?

That there’s no such thing as a true human hermaphrodite and they’re still either male or female at the gamete-production-pathway level, regardless of how disgustingly disordered their development of secondary sex characteristics (for example) might’ve been.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Your premise is flawed on multiple levels.

  1. By definition, reproductive organs are Primary sex characteristics. Not secondary. A lot of Intersex conditions relate to ambiguous states of reproductive organs. Alternatively, other intersex conditions relate to extra sex chromosomes (or a missing sex chromosome and/or non-gamete cells with differing sex chromosomes for that matter)
  2. Intersex (no [sic], that’s not an typo/error.) dose not mean hermaphrodite. The term hermaphrodite is extremely misleading in this context and was a major reason it fell out of use.
  3. Intersex People with both testiclar and ovary tissue exist.
  4. At birth, In presence of said ambiguous states for reproductive organs doctors may list a sex by arbitrary means.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Chance (user link) says:

I feel that if there is any government intervention, the right approach is just to ban all algorithmic feeds, things designed to increase user interaction by addiction.

This has been a scourge of the Internet since it started. Before, individuals were connected by communities, by interest, by locality. Now we’re connected by common addictions.

We used to lovingly refer to these online social moments as “memes”, now we’re at a point where preventible childhood diseases are making a comeback because of the anti-vaccination crowd. And I dare say at a point where a significant amount of the US population believes that the 2020 election was stolen for vastly similar reasons.

Trying to legislate trouble that teens and children are having by trying to shape algorithms is the wrong approach.

Limiting what children interact with to include mostly people they know IRL or people they build specific relationships with is a much better approach.

Yes, I get it. It Facebook, Twitter/X, Youtube would need to go back to their 2005 selves. It is just a sign we are a decade too late.

(I’m also not advocating that this approach is best for children, either, in the immediate. But ridding platforms of algorithmic addiction is by far the best first action long term.)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Chance says:

Re: Re: Re:2

If your code causes people to die running out of a crowded theater, any possible first amendment claim doesn’t matter.

Remember that the tobacco industry settled in 1998 with 46 states because their addictive products caused expensive medical treatments, affecting their bottom lines, Medicaid, etc.

That settlement included a yearslong campaign (“truth”) that curbed advertising towards youth, and over $200B worth of payments.

The federal government could have improved that situation far earlier, instead we waited… oh, 70 years, for anything collective to happen.

I get wanting to improve this situation for kids, being exposed to things they just aren’t ready for. But saying “hey these algorithms, maybe we should do things to them” is missing the forest for the trees IMNSHO.

We built it, it’s easy to make it go away.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5

Ken White, an attorney and owner of Popehat, has stated that even though Schenck v. United States affirmed that the First Amendment is not absolute, “you can’t shout fire in a crowded theater” is frequently used as a red herring when discussing whether or not a particular instance of speech falls under exceptions set by the Supreme Court.

Literally from your own article.

Chance says:

Re: Re: Re:8

Well, to go in some sort of direction that isn’t a direct self-own of the Anonymous Coward..

Free speech protections in the US is about the freedom to peaceably assemble, to contradict the government, and freedom of the press. It’s about the relationship of people to the government.

Outside of the government is not on the table in the First Amendment.

Your free speech can land you in court for defaming someone. It’s difficult as **** to prove, but you can lose a case like that. (Current events….)

When you, say, decide in protest to lie on your taxes (ostensibly an expression of speech), it doesn’t help you.

Listing ways speech can land you in court, or fined, or run up against some law.. are many and varied.

HOWEVER – any algorithm on a platform that is just about addicting users is not related to communicating with the government.

And if it were – if these algorithms that are intended to be addictive – had a central role in communicating to the government, they should rightly regulate it so that first amendment rights are protected.

Remember this? https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/10/05/1036519/facebook-whistleblower-frances-haugen-algorithms/

It isn’t in that link directly, but in that testimony, we found out that Facebook has knobs that can increase or decrease items of interest, including things like vaccine hesitancy and birtherism.

That code deployed on Facebook is taking people’s time, and interacting with people. Facebook is known to do things like host psychological studies of interactions with their platform, as well.

“It’s just code” I doubt is going to fly here, ultimately. This isn’t an expression of speech of someone to the government, or abridging the rights of individuals to assemble.

This is the government saying “hey, wait, this is bad for your health, bad for the health of your children, and forums where Facebook is ****ing around with visibility is actively against everyone’s interests” instead of allowing Facebook to allow whatever toxic train wreck topic keep eyeballs… this is a welcome change.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

I feel that if there is any government intervention, the right approach is just to ban all algorithmic feeds,

Sort by date, select by friends, hide by name etc. are all algorithms modifying a feed. Hell, on a computer, even random selection is an algorithm. Eliminate algorithmic feed is the same as eliminate the Internet, as what you see on it is all governed by algorithms.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

increase user interaction by addiction

You’ve just described a side effect of making an app user-friendly. Literally “date, select by friends, hide by name” increase user interaction. If those basic functions were missing, people wouldn’t use it as much.

It sounds like you effectively want to outlaw “algorithms I don’t like” without actually defining “algorithms I don’t like.”

JMT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

It sounds like you effectively want to outlaw “algorithms I don’t like” without actually defining “algorithms I don’t like.”

A lot of the people blaming “algorithms” for all social media ills couldn’t even define the word, particularly in the context of designing and operating a SM site. They’ve latched onto the word because they’ve been convinced it has negative connotations only. Anyone making “algorithm bad!” arguments should not be taken seriously unless they can get far more specific.

Chance says:

Re: Re: Re:3

The worship of algorithms used in social situations on this site is mind-boggling.

There is no problem saying “hey, this is DESIGNED WITH INTENT TO ADDICT” and regulating it. That combination with the volume and type of people who post highly personal things.. this is a tinderbox opened by social media sites and companies.

For the record, I spend my days at work buried in code. Maybe “those who talk about algorithms” find college-level algorithms boring.

Posting another link to the same congressional testimony I posted earlier: https://www.npr.org/2021/10/05/1043377310/facebook-whistleblower-frances-haugen-congress

“Haugen has leaked one Facebook study that found that 13.5% of U.K. teen girls in one survey say their suicidal thoughts became more frequent after starting on Instagram.

Another leaked study found 17% of teen girls say their eating disorders got worse after using Instagram.

About 32% of teen girls said that when they felt bad about their bodies, Instagram made them feel worse, Facebook’s researchers found, which was first reported by the Journal.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., accused Facebook of intentionally targeting children under age 13 with an “addictive” product — despite the app requiring users be 13 years or older.

“It is clear that Facebook prioritizes profit over the well-being of children and all users,” she said.”

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5

hi.. eh listen.. suicides of girls in these age groups skyrocketed after social media and the internet became a thing. Like FORGET ABOUT THIS SHIT THAT THEY ARE DOING, THERE IS A BIG PROBLEM WITH SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE INTERNET. IT IS NOT LIFE IT IS THE INTERNET. please dont be a moron about such an important matter.

Rocky says:

Re: Re: Re:4

Lets break down what you are saying:

You argue that social media algorithms is specifically made to addict people. Then you talk about studies that basically says “social media can exacerbate pre-existing mental conditions”. Then you connect those two things without bothering to actually show the casual link.

The last part is important, but you left it out. In short, nowhere is it said that the algorithms causes these disorders – it’s mostly actual social interaction and peer pressure that causes these disorders, social media just makes it them more visible.

For the record, I spend my days at work buried in code. Maybe “those who talk about algorithms” find college-level algorithms boring.

Considering your reasoning above, I’m not sure I would hire you based on the glaring lack of logic and how you conflated addiction with exacerbating.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Eh, then you run into the problem of isolating into only your local community at best. And overtime that becomes a problem. it creates mistrust and a lack of empathy/understanding for whatever is outside that local community.

stranger danger is a very real concern. Yet it still takes time to get to know a person.

As for people presenting a false persona? Nothing stops that from happening in your local community either.

That One Guy (profile) says:

The perfect PR punching bag

Honestly as much as their actions, dishonesty and hypocrisy disgust me I struggle to really blame politicians treating tech companies like on-demand punching bags and scapegoats because all they have to do is look at one of those companies with a mean look and the CEO’s fall all over themselves to grovel at the politician’s feet and gush about how they are totally right and the tech company will get right on doing everything they can to comply with whatever lie and/or delusion is being spouted today.

With tech companies willingly laying down as doormats at the slightest hint of political displeasure, no matter how divorced from reality a politician is why wouldn’t politicians feel perfectly safe to keep treating them like pet masochists on a leash?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Everyone knows that any so-called attempt to “protect” kids is thinly disguised homophobia, and a failed bid to try and tell kids that we don’t exist.

The law will not prevent our access to children. Boys will learn to wear makeup and dresses, and girls will take their rightful place. We are the true way and no idiots believing in some imaginary sky friend is going to stop us.

We got gay marriage approved in this country. The freaks might have taken the right to abortion away from us, but they have no idea just how big of a hornet’s nest they have kicked.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

Y’know, I’m not entirely certain, but I think Techdirt admins have access to both the IP addresses of commenters and the FBI tip line for, y’know, child predators and CSAM. So maaaaaaaaaaaybe reconsider posting something on a public-facing website that, even as a joke, implies a desire to rape children.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

implies a desire to rape children

Sounds like a “you” problem. At no point in the post was sexual assault of minors stated.

Encouraging boys to explore their sexual identities in preparation of them being open to demisexuality and non-binary identification is not even remotely threatening, except to close-minded bigots who want to turn everything LGBTQ+ into a sexual conspiracy so they can claim the narrative we rightfully wrested from their hands.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Eh. I think the OP will be fine. Mike’s generally very principled and permissive on his approach to user comments, and the usage of IP address information.

There’s, what, one guy from Singapore who keeps ranting about his desires to unalive Rupert Murdoch, Bratty Matty and davec, and he sure as fuck isn’t dissuaded from continuing to talk about it, even if it’s not a joke.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...