Half of me worries about the nanny/surveillance state aspect of this.
Half of me wants us to ban it for adults too.
Half of me wants us to ban it for adults too.
The coordinated track that governments around the world are on (sponsored by corporations), is that governments and corps will be able to monitor and track individuals online - people will be deanonymised (via OS logins, no side loading, 'protect the children'). The ostensibly kind desires are just sugar.
Even if you accept that fact that people are online too much (by choice), teens are drinking/smoking less. When you push one thing another pops out. Forcing 'good' conformity on others, is actually psychological meddling. In my view meddling with another's desires (even if it's for their own good, in your opinion) is a form of psychological abuse. Inner re-engineering of others should not be normalised or accepted because it is done by government.
Having corporations in the role of 'bad cop', allows the illusion that the government is 'good cop', and that they can manage reality for the greater good.
However, the only entity that can manage reality, is the individual for themselves. Working with a constrained subset of reality, means you do not actually have the full picture.
Perversely, not having the full picture, means that people pretend that someone else has got this for us (government). Seeking an external authority, rather than working through reality personally, prevents the individual from building up the correct understanding: only you can manage yourself correctly. Having information hidden from you supports the idea that individuals are not capable of managing themselves, and encourages 'looking outside for help' aka nannying to manage one's difficulties. It puts people into a state of neoteny - prolonged adolescence - which benefits those who use psychopathic/narcissistic tricks. It's a choreographed, incremental ballet, that is intended to get 'the people' to a destination (technocratic governance) that no one would choose.
The state can, at least in theory, be structured to serve rather than exploit us.
On top of that, the idea that individuals have the time, energy, or inclination to completely manage their own "reality" rather than relying on external authorities is daft imo. At some point we need to trust and rely on eachother and there are various entities beyond nation states that are set up specifically for that too.
.. and governments are the same.
I believe we already live in a form of fascism where business and governments are aspects of the same entity.
> The state can, at least in theory, be structured to serve rather than exploit us.
I disagree. It can soak up believers energy though, forcing people against others who they have no personal issues with.
> On top of that, the idea that individuals have the time, energy, or inclination to completely manage their own "reality" rather than relying on external authorities is daft imo.
It might be daft in your opinion, but assuming the answers you want will be provided externally could be a working definition of insanity, imo.
And so do you not trust health advice from the WHO? Do you do your own controlled trials instead?
But we all know this is not happening because governments profit greatly and have much to gain from their symbiotic relationships with tech companies. So it's easier to hassle tax payers, or in this case children to gain political points.