• yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Notice how 11 year olds aren’t making bank accounts? It’s actually very easy to enforce age-restricted access online; more to your point, the US just doesn’t do so. Which will be our downfall as a generation raised on YouTube and instagram just hit voting age and overwhelmingly chose Donald Trump.

        • Zorque@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 days ago

          Doing a real good job of building bridges to convey your ideas, I see…

          Unless of course you don’t want to share thoughts and just want to be right.

          With banks there’s a financial incentive for private institutions to provide barriers. Barriers that can still be bypassed with the right tools and initiative. That incentive doesn’t exist for media providers. They just want their content as accessible as possible. Meaning any roadblocks they’re forced to utilize will be half-assed at best.

          Not to mention it’s a stupid idea in the first place. Banning something doesn’t make it better, it just makes it more tantalizing. Just look at prohibition, or abstinence only education. All it does is create a more unsafe environment for those outlets.

    • drake@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 days ago

      I understand where you’re coming from, but if you dig deeper into the problem, I think that it becomes clearer and clearer that social media is more of a symptom than the cause of the problem. The real issue is that people are becoming more and more aware that the system is failing them - wages are stagnant but prices are soaring, protections against the worst excesses of corporations are eroding, climate change is causing people to lose their homes and livelihoods…

      People are desperate for someone to blame and for an alternative. Fascism offers easy answers that let people blame some “others” but just makes things worse. Leftists have uncomfortable answers that require you to admit your complicity in the system before you can begin to dismantle it.

    • Dhs92
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 days ago

      Banks require a valid ID and a social security number lol

      • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        And therefore will be prime targets by the government to act as an identity broker for services with an online age requirement.

    • Saleh@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      That comparison is completely out of touch. You making a bank account means entering a strictly regulated contractual relationship. And for starters banks will require you to have an address and send letters to it. Do you want every online website to first send you an activation code by post?