The real solution is to change the direction of technology towards technologies that aren’t harmful to kids and societies (by definition, the same) but help them, but that’s less profitable for companies like Meta.
Adding more policing to platforms cannot and will not solve these problems, but it will perfect absolutely insanely good systems of control that will inevitably be used for other purposes and under “unintended” circumstances.
I wonder if this is the theater of pretext for deploying information control systems at scale, because if I designed a bulletproof publicly defendable justification for rolling them out it would look pretty much like this.
This isn’t conspiracy theory and should be dismissed. This action comes directly on the heels of disinformation being identified by the WEF as the leading threat in the world in 2024, and huge concerns about interference in the 2024 elections in the US.
If we assume that it’s never about what it’s about (aka mass communication principle #1: the cover story is rarely the real story) and there are no coincidences in national security, this really looks like the pretext is being put in place for greater monitoring and control.
- https://www.pymnts.com/news/security-and-risk/2024/attack-ve...
- https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2024/01/ai-democracy-election...
- https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/06/1137302
Also, stuff like this has policymakers deeply concerned:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/30/us/politics/ai-child-sex-...
It helps to look at the policy documents that decision makers are reading to understand why these information tools are being put in place.
See key takeaways on Page 68:
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/GlobalT...