Oh wow. That’s some weird shit piefed does.

Yeah, it is great advice. But I’m under no illusion that’s happening anytime soon, not for most people.

The context matters. And in this instance “stop using social media” feels more like blaming the abused teenager while the rest of the world carries on, like its totally dismissive of what she’s saying.

No, but it’s still a more isolated environment. There aren’t bunch of ads or grifters or whatever on campus because it at least tries to insulate kids from the outside world profiting off them, and to curate what they experience.

That’s what they need on their phones, too. Lord of the Flies is better than Big Brother.

I guess the difficult part would be to blunt the outside from flooding in, like kids mass reposting Andrew Tate. But at least there would be some control/fairness with exposure, instead of an engagement algorithm ruling their feed.

Gestures at Lemmy comments in this post. See what I mean?

should be looked at to be regulated the same way gambling and addictive drugs are.

Yet here we are, still in the War on Drugs. Betting apps are exploding in popularity and being straight up paraded by politicians and business leaders.

I agree with the sentiment, but I don’t think the engagement feedback issue will be addressed directly. It’s too profitable. We’re cooked, for a while. So maybe we should reach for every half measure with a chance of passing, like restricting kids?

I mean, old forums were pretty messed up.

Your point stands though. The old internet isn’t what the average person experiences, anymore.

What IMO would be the best solution is to force social media sites to have a cordoned off “children” section where kids can socialise with their peers without predatory adults having any form of access to them. But that’s easier said than done, unfortunately.

In real life, we call this school!

It can definitely be done. It’s not difficult, it’s just that the world is not heading in that direction.

Exactly! Precisely. It’s affecting her real life, too.

That “just don’t use social media then” response in itself feels… misogynistic? This isn’t her choice; she can’t ignore the catastrophic effects.

Using social media has ruined my self-esteem and my relation to being a girl in this world, and nearly every day I feel hatred towards my gender, my appearance, or even teenage boys as a category. The misogyny I see from boys my age online, which is echoed in real life too, has made me grow resentful and bitter towards them, as much as I try to avoid it. As wrong as it is, I persistently find myself considering if there are truly any boys out there who are not misogynistic to some extent, and have even questioned whether I can find love in the future because of this. I understand that boys are victims of harmful content, as well as perpetrators of online misogyny – they’re growing up learning how to do this from the adults who post misogynistic videos first. But even so, I feel such a strong divide now between girls and boys in my generation, especially when the way they talk about us in real life mirrors the way they do on the internet.

That’s fucked up.

That level of misogyny is definitely learned, but it’s not just her age group. I’m floored by (for example) some comments my Dad makes, a “quiet, respectful, classy” type guy who’s never had a Facebook or Insta, who’d you’d never expect to hear insults from. And it’s definitely worse after he watches Fox News… that shit is like a drug.

My school “friends” dropped my jaw, sometimes. They got a lot from their parents, but social media (Faceboook back then) absolutely made it worse.

Even here on Lemmy, the disrespect or casual sexism from commenters sometimes makes me want to throw up. Not that I’m a particularly standup guy or anything, but the longer I live, the more I wonder “the fuck happened to my sex?” I certainly can’t critique this girl for wondering the same thing.

The whole point of the algorithm is attention. Yeah, they could try to actually police it so coded versions of “kill yourself, ugly bitch” don’t spread, but that language works, and it makes the posters rich.

You can’t get around for “addiction for ad dollars” being the whole point. It’s always going to surface ragebait, trash talk or whatever because that’s what sells attention, no matter how hard it’s fought.

…So yeah. Policing isnt going to do anything. Don’t tell your representatives something that won’t work, and worse, has the “theatre” of helping.

I don’t know a good “solution” other than burning it all to the ground, but honestly, banning as many people as possible sounds like a good idea to me.

On Reddit, Karma isn’t just more visible, but a certain amount is an explicit requirement for posting in many situations. High karma accounts are also less likely to get moderated/banned. You can see why spambots would want to amass it.

I have no idea what the incentive would be here.

Also, this is not that far from Instagram. And even with real women Insta always felt slimy to me.

And… weird. I don’t get the appeal.

This is why I love the idea of Cromite and other “antifingerprinting” efforts, not simply blocking but spoofing and plausibly randomizing as many metrics as they can.

I wish there was some way to distribute that to the masses. Like maybe a crazy hardware zero day, and it’s only used to stealth load anti fingerprinting on as many devices as it can.

What I barely understand is why businesses keep fueling this ad inferno. If it’s mostly bots farming engagement, isn’t that going to limit the effectiveness of advertising? Won’t that eventually show up in their returns on the advertising’? Do they really want their business associated with scantily clad 14 year old feeds, or are they all totally blind to that.

I get part of it… social media is the internet now, for most people. So if you want reach, where else are ya gonna go? Cable? Newspapers? Local news? They killed everything else. Google’s even killing YouTube sponsors now, auto skipping sponsor segments in the app.

I don’t intend to be abrasive, but this post feels like… bait?

I know it’s not.

But still. OP posted few specifics of what they actually do on their computer, nor what their hardware is, nor specific problems, and is not responding to any comments thus far. But “what distro should I use?” is Lemmy catnip. It’s absolutely guaranteed to get a lot of engagement.

It’s also been asked many, many times. If OP is curious, there are literally thousands of comments to sift through on Lemmy alone.

If this was Reddit, I’d say it’s a bot account farming karma for authenticity. But that doesn’t makes any sense, as there’s no engagement incentive like that here on Lemmy.

So yeah. Apologies for impoliteness, I meant nothing personally, but OP, there are many threads like this, and you’d get much more tailored suggestions with a little more specificity.

I mean… if they’re still on Windows 7, they’ll likely keep using Firefox anyway?

I just wanted to guess before I read it.

Yep.

Whoa.

Well, I bet my pants that Justice Clarence Thomas is a dissenting opinion. Does it say in the article?

Chip designs take years, so if there’s a sudden glut of HBM, there’s no good way to put it to use outside of existing designs.

That being said, a lot of LPDDRX is being produced for Nvidia servers and a few other systems. That would be useful. Doubly so if we packaged as LPCAMM.

Sounds like fud, from all angles. No one but Tech Bros and their bots care about crypto, porn has always been porn. There are literally thousands of great, dirt cheap games to play.

But anecdotally, I observed YouTube suck away a lot of attention from games and TV in my family. It’s lower brainpower, so if one is (say) dog tired from work, the algorithm has a lot of appeal vs a hardcore KCD2 session or an intense TV drama.

Discoverability is certainly an issue too. If game advertising boils down to “The TikTok algorithm and YouTube influencers,” then of course the predatory casino games are going to win that war.