@neil absolutely drives me wild. And you're spot on. It's gross controlling behavior by the folks left in the dark ages hand wringing about something they know nothing about. The adoption of that by fellow parents drives me wild. The amount of parents I've had to unbrainwash during my time as a parent that "screens" are perfectly fine, it's what you're kids do on them and how you as a parent engage with that, that needs consideration. Like you say, all books are not made equal. Exactly the same.

@neil I think the fundamental problem behind all this is that the people calling for the legislation, and the people writing it, mostly grew up in a time where you had to leave the house for most things.

They can't understand / accept that things have changed, and want their children to grow up as they did, because obviously what they did was The Right Way.

(see also: O levels vs GCSEs etc.)

@neil Anecdote time - my father didn't particularly like me reading books because he didn't know what was in them, didn't like me reading Teletext (nearest thing we had to online!) for the same reason. Didn't like the music I made. BUT! he also didn't like me going out because he didn't know who I was talking to about what, plus didn't like my friends anyway. Didn't want me going to youth clubs because they were in the church hall and I might catch the religion. It's all about control innit.

@neil a phrase I hear a lot around proposed or actual legislation in this area is "everyone knows what we mean by this".

I think what's rapidly becoming apparent is that a) I don't think everyone does know and b) even if they did, legislation doesn't work like that.

@neil "going outside and meeting people" - where and with what money?

everywhere seems hellbent on deterring teenagers, shit like those mosquito alarms in town centres were everywhere not long after I left college

@neil When there's more investment in spaces for "children" to attend and socialise together safely then there's a discussion to be had.

But in many places our libraries are closed and cutbacks on public spaces for kids.

Those legislators can go away and go away some more.

We know what it's really about. More surveillance capitalism with a veneer of "think about the children".

This in no way keeps the kids safe.

@neil this "omg teenager are online" framing is pretty wrong. For me the problem is that they're frying their brains on platforms that are designed to be highly addictive which do not provide any benefit.
But that is not only a problem with kids, adults are also falling into that trap everywhere.

We need restrictions on algorithm-based, commercial "social" media platforms. not on time spent with a computer.

@neil

How do people define 'sociable'? What is the difference between two people meeting up a a library / cafe to play say chess and two people playing online?

What is the difference between people meeting up and playing a game such as command and conquer face to face and playing online.

In both cases it is a 'social' activity, just done differently,

What about CB/Ham radio, is that not social interaction.?

@neil YES, where are the eu initiatives to provide free sheltered/heated/cooled public hangout spaces for kids, where they also have free access to food and drink

also, I'm old enough to remember the government scare campaigns from the 80s and 90s like "It's 4PM. Do you know where your teenager is? If they're not at home, they're probably DOING DRUGS. 😡"

@neil one day we'll see a study that says kids will go outside and play, just as soon as they damn well feel safe and free to go out, so we ought to stop writing laws telling them WTF to do.

If they want to enforce going outside to play, they should bring a jungle gym in and see which lawmakers are brave enough to enjoy some play time.

(Please, someone do this! I'll break my 10+ month media fast to watch it live!)

@neil my (disabled) daughter certainly spends 6 hours a day online, and has since she was a child. Most of that time is spent talking to her friends. if someone has a problem with that - with kids spending time with friends in whatever way works for them - then they have their heads on wrong.

@neil probably also the same people who complain about groups of youths riding bikes, or fight against planning permission for a McDonalds because it would be a hangout spot. 😒

@neil @bencurthoys @fullywoolly @mastodonmigration @schmidt_fu @raven667 @sldrant

This isn't about protecting children from Facebook. This is about eradicating healthy nonprofit alternatives to Facebook, such as the Fediverse.

If you'll read the vast majority of these laws, you'll find that they impose compliance costs that only Facebook can afford. No way that's an accident.

Protecting children is the excuse. Controlling public discourse using the Facebook algorithm is the goal.

It is also interesting to ponder what is meant by "spending time online", and how that is calculated.

Is it the same as "screen time"? And, if so, does that include time spent reading books on a device with a screen, of which I do a lot as I love my eReader?

I presume that my time reading and writing fedi posts is "online" time?

Time spent reading/replying to email? But not if I had printed the email to read on paper?

Time on calls with people? But not if I had the same meeting in a room with the same people?

Time collaborating on a document in etherpad? But not doing the same work in vim running locally?

Time watching a film from my media server (or Netflix, for the sake of argument)? But not if it were non-IP broadcast TV?

#EUKIDSAct