Don't know how this could be implemented in a good way (so FB etc do not get access to important identity information), but trying to limit social media for kids below 13 is a fantastic idea.
One could wish the adults/parents would limit this themselves, but sadly this is seldom the case. For some reason it seems most parents really are clueless to the level of harm imposed by social media to their kids?!
COPA already effectively does this, but kids just lie about their age. Making FB and company liable for those cases where parents decide to let their preteens go wild on social media seems insane.
True, but it only takes a single country anywhere in the world to keep the internet free. And by keeping the net free, they'll get all the money, so they're is a strong incentive to do so.
In the event there are no countries left there are still options:
1. Hidden services
2. Decentralized
3. Just create a pool mechanism where you contribute your private key for whatever gov Auth system exists, then use a random id from the pool among all sign-ups everytime you sign up for a service.
As mentioned by Hilary Clinton in a recent interview on the rest of politics, it's very telling that when silicon valley entrepreneurs advertise for nannies, they often have strict requirements for minimising screen time.
Seems like there's pretty strong revealed preference here (watch what people do not what they say). The people building this tech know it's harmful to kids.
As a parent the argument I hear most often is that all the other kids have it so it's almost impossible to stop your own kids. I don't necessarily buy that, my kids are still young but I intend to keep them away from social media as long as possible.
I think it’s also that kids are far smarter than generally given credit for, and are perfectly capable of going behind their parents’ backs.
What is needed, and has been for some time, is an identity service.
This does exist in some parts of the world - here in Portugal, for instance, I access government services online with a smartcard, password and 2FA - and I don’t see why they couldn’t extend this as a general SSO service using oauth or whatever to provide accredited identities to providers who require it due to regulation. The provider doesn’t need to receive anything from the auth apart from a user id, or a “deny access”.
I don't understand that "behind parents back" bit.
My teen kids aren't on social. I know this because their dumb phones don't support it, and their computers are not permitted in their rooms (Kitchen table only).
I suppose they could get on, through a friends smart-phone, but that would be limited to the time they spend on the bus to/from school.
1. none of their friends have the money to have an old phone.
2. When would they have the time. They're home, and at school. Band, Judo, Cadets, Tutoring. Where's the time to hide a phone.
3. I'll stipulate that some kids could do it. Vast majority would get caught. And my kids fear the pink bunny suit I have in my closet. I'd walk them to school every day for a month. Lets seem them stay on facebook through that. :)
Maybe I just have a different view of pricing, but I find €120 a year for 2TB with unlimited versions, ability to share files of any size, rock solid syncing on all my devices etc to be extremely cheap!
Back when I decided which cloud storage to use, all the big ones were at 1TB and dorpbox was the most expensive with the least features, while microsofts offer included office 365 for nearly half the price.
The main advantage for Dropbox is that file sync works flawlessly. I've had issues with Onedrive and Google Drive in the past. Maybe they fixed those, but I can't trust them anymore.
Agree. I am forced to use OneDrive when I do consultation work for one of my customers, still works like crap compared to Dropbox with slow syncing etc.
Imagine if someone offered you gasoline for 50 cents a gallon, delivered directly to your car, but for personal use only and the minimum contract is 400 gallons a week.
> Poor countries will most likely follow suit, but it will take a while.
The reason why poor countries are poor is in large part because they are economically and socially structured in ways that make it very difficult for them to take advantage of technological advancement, and as great as ChatGPT is, I think it will have very little impact on the productivity of poor countries.
“Tipping is about making sure the people who are performing that service for you are getting paid what they’re owed” - This sums up the entire problem with tipping. It's just simply wrong / false.
Actually tipping is making sure that the owner of a café can get away with paying a too low salary to the employee.
So best advice: don't tip! You are keeping alive a system where it is up to you, the customer, to (maybe) ensure the employee is making a decent amount of money. That is flipping the issue of money on the head. This should be a matter between the employee and the business, using a contract, you know, like every other normal business relationship works!
Awesome demo. Reminds me of the days where I coded the good old 6510 chip while enjoying SID tunes. I spent almost a year of my youth coding a game called "Timezone", which someone actually put on YouTube: https://youtu.be/nHLmxATNl0w
Those were the days of late night assembler debugging
I fondly remember playing this game. I think I got it off one of those CP Verlag magazines-on-disk.
Watching the YouTube video the sound effects immediately trigger a bunch of nostalgia, whereas the random particles that kill you trigger a bunch of frustration :)
