Should social media be 18+?

[PhantomXero1x]

Well we've all seen what would happen if minors were given any kind of social media. And we've also seen how they have become the next puritans as well too.

Then there is also the risk of being groomed and dealing with all sorts of creeps online.

Not to mention, many minors end up becoming lolcows at such a young age and its no wonder, people like Chris Chan are the way they are due to lack of parental guidance and also the people around him were just shitbags. But that aside, do you think minors should be allowed online access that isn't schoolwork?

 

[Deliberate Zero]

Social media should not be. It is a blight upon the world.

 

[cunny poster]

Ehh, people and groomed irl and if someone becomes a cow in their youth they were either doomed or destined to be lolcows , so what im saying is they should be held to the same standard online , sinceyou know they like to act like adults

 

[Hibiki]

There's no way to stop them from using it besides of some bullshit id verification system like UK has where you have to use your credit card to access porn sites.
I think I prefer having to tolerate underage tards and their annoying takes before giving up more freedom/privacy to governments and corporations

 

[Volari]

Nah, that would mean destroying the existing online natural selection in my opinion. And I'm pretty sure you've noticed minors trawl porn sites too, so I don't know what this age barrier would even accomplish if it did exist.

 

[PhantomXero1x]

Nah, that would mean destroying the existing online natural selection in my opinion. And I'm pretty sure you've noticed minors trawl porn sites too, so I don't know what this age barrier would even accomplish if it did exist.

That does bring a good point yes, it would just ruin natural selection.

 

[immahnoob]

There's no way to stop them from using it besides of some bullshit id verification system like UK has where you have to use your credit card to access porn sites.
I think I prefer having to tolerate underage tards and their annoying takes before giving up more freedom/privacy to governments and corporations

This is correct, but in a hypothetical and unrealistic situation, yes, I wouldn't want minors there, actually, I would like if we got rid of social media sites and went back to talking to people on the street, pubs, hobbies, etc.
That won't happen though, social media is just "too good" for the powers that be.

 

[Deliberate Zero]

To elaborate: in principle, this is not a good idea. Age limits are a quick and dirty way to solve a much more complicated problem. Which would you trust more to operate a plough, a highly credentialled adult with ten years of experience in HR, or an 8-year-old boy who's been driving tractors for a few years already? You get a decent kid who knows how to keep his mouth shut, and he's already more mature than any furry you shake a stick at. So, perhaps it should be that people acting childishly should be banned regardless of age.

Now that we've established that age is not relevant because you don't have to be old to be wise, we can get to the real problem. The only way to enforce that is to corrupt the internet to its core.

On the internet, we are all just text on a screen. There is no age, sex, race, country, handedness, dexterity, walking speed, BMI, or any other physical factors from the real world. It doesn't matter if you happen to be something inhuman, because none of us should know or care. These things are only relevant in the offline world. The only way to enforce an age limit is to remove the anonymity that makes the internet such a good place to begin with.

I'm sure any number of governments and journalists would be ecstatic to support this idea of tying your online presence to a real name, age, face, address etc. And if you would entertain this idea, of destroying the internet because some kids are getting on your nerves, you deserve everything you wish to have: to lie in the bed you asked for them to make on your behalf. But the rest of us don't deserve that kind of infrastructure vandalism, so let's not.

 

[Narbray]

Nah, that would mean destroying the existing online natural selection in my opinion. And I'm pretty sure you've noticed minors trawl porn sites too, so I don't know what this age barrier would even accomplish if it did exist.

That does bring a good point yes, it would just ruin natural selection.

is that natural selection does not necessarily have to go in the right direction.
we could be creating something very bad

There's no way to stop them from using it besides of some bullshit id verification system like UK has where you have to use your credit card to access porn sites.
I think I prefer having to tolerate underage tards and their annoying takes before giving up more freedom/privacy to governments and corporations

this makes sense
the only thing to do is to make everyone aware that opinions on social networks are perhaps made by minors who may have no idea what they are talking about.
don't get me wrong I am not one of those adults who believe that children should be kept quiet and never taken into account and that only adults can determine for them.
but, it is a fact that children cannot be determining about things that simply are not for them and do not concern them.
and unfortunately, children love to draw attention to themselves and get involved in adult things to think they are more mature and decisive.

To elaborate: in principle, this is not a good idea. Age limits are a quick and dirty way to solve a much more complicated problem. Which would you trust more to operate a plough, a highly credentialled adult with ten years of experience in HR, or an 8-year-old boy who's been driving tractors for a few years already? You get a decent kid who knows how to keep his mouth shut, and he's already more mature than any furry you shake a stick at. So, perhaps it should be that people acting childishly should be banned regardless of age.

Now that we've established that age is not relevant because you don't have to be old to be wise, we can get to the real problem. The only way to enforce that is to corrupt the internet to its core.

On the internet, we are all just text on a screen. There is no age, sex, race, country, handedness, dexterity, walking speed, BMI, or any other physical factors from the real world. It doesn't matter if you happen to be something inhuman, because none of us should know or care. These things are only relevant in the offline world. The only way to enforce an age limit is to remove the anonymity that makes the internet such a good place to begin with.

I'm sure any number of governments and journalists would be ecstatic to support this idea of tying your online presence to a real name, age, face, address etc. And if you would entertain this idea, of destroying the internet because some kids are getting on your nerves, you deserve everything you wish to have: to lie in the bed you asked for them to make on your behalf. But the rest of us don't deserve that kind of infrastructure vandalism, so let's not.

this would be the best
determine who can use social networks regardless of their age, since in the end many adults are also a problem in social networks.
but the questions would be
how and who will determine who has the right to use social networks and who does not?
Based on what?
And most importantly, will they do it correctly?

 

[cunny poster]

Groom or be Groomed.

 

[psicosisbk]

It definitely should be +18. Too many uneducated kids talking shit and putting themselves in danger with groomers. But kids spend a shit ton of time on the internet, wich means big money in ads.

 

[cunny poster]

It definitely should be +18.

Dangerously cucked.

and putting themselves in danger with groomers.

Kids get groomed irl, and are far more likely to be molested by a relative statistically speaking.

But kids spend a shit ton of time on the internet, wich means big money in ads.

Capitalist pilled.

 

[psicosisbk]

Dangerously cucked.

Kids get groomed irl, and are far more likely to be molested by a relative statistically speaking.

Capitalist pilled.

It's not that I care that much that kids are getting groomed on the internet, but it's a reality.
Wich bothers me the most is me having to read their shit takes from time to time, I don't want any of that shit.

 

[cunny poster]

It's not that I care that much that kids are getting groomed on the internet, but it's a reality.
Wich bothers me the most is me having to read their shit takes from time to time, I don't want any of that shit.

Fair enough, just keep in mind a lot of Draconian acts are taken in the name of helping kids, when in truth it does nothing of the sort.

 

[FunsLeaf]

Children should be kept off of the internet in general at least until their parents can teach them how to not be completely retarded online.

Unfortunately this is a pipe dream that will probably never happen en mass as many people are retarded, and the state definitely should definitely fuck off from enforcing age limits on social media.

 

[Hexasheep93]

I dont like social media I think it has made people, ironically, a lot more antisocial and this is specially true with kids. I may be looking at the past with rose tinted glasses but I dont recall kids sending death threats over the most minor bs.

Ideally id rather there be more smaller specialized sites (like this one ).
As for making it 18+ yeah.
Yes theres no way of enforcing it but now the responsability lies firmly on the parents/guardians who let their kids access a place that is clearly labeled as being for adults only

 

[limpandazure]

 

[versvlees]

I dont like social media I think it has made people, ironically, a lot more antisocial and this is specially true with kids. I may be looking at the past with rose tinted glasses but I dont recall kids sending death threats over the most minor bs.

Ideally id rather there be more smaller specialized sites (like this one ).
As for making it 18+ yeah.
Yes theres no way of enforcing it but now the responsability lies firmly on the parents/guardians who let their kids access a place that is clearly labeled as being for adults only

Oh kids sending death threats and being stupid on the interwebs is nothing new. The difference now is kids are posting/sending the same dumb ass shit but now they are doing it with their IRL social media accounts. Que surprised Pikachu face when their retard posting follows them into IRL and yet they still don't release why its happening.

And yes the parents are too blame. Their chimps outs and think of the children rage is another factor why we see more censorship. Its the whole ban steaks for everyone because babies can choke on them. Also, its not like parents read ADULT ONLY labels considering they keep buying GTA games for Little Billy. Then proceed to bitch about muh violent vidija when they see Little Billy play the game.

 

[BananaCarrot]

In my opinion social media should be 18+, especially with all this real life bullying, doxxings, child grooming and so on. Kids should instead prefer forums which can be moderated much easier and certain chat apps (except discord since it's pedophiles' dreamland).

 

[cunny poster]

In my opinion social media should be 18+, especially with all this real life bullying, doxxings, child grooming and so on. Kids should instead prefer forums which can be moderated much easier and certain chat apps (except discord since it's pedophiles' dreamland).

Stupid wrong opinion, if you lot keep having wrong opinions some faggots gonna make draconian laws they won't enforce and it'll make things way worse, are you fucking retarded?