China and our children. AIBU to be deeply concerned?

[Concerningalgorithms]

I read this article and am so concerned. So many of our kids are on TT.

https://nypost.com/2023/02/25/china-is-hurting-us-kids-with-tiktok-but-protecting-its-own/amp/

Basically, TT and other SM have the same effect on our brain as addictive substances such as heroine. Developers know this and create highly addictive (make use of our knowledge of the reward centre in our brain), apps/platforms/games that leave us with dopamine crashes when we can’t have it. So that tantrum or meltdown when we say ‘turn screens off now’ is partly, if not mostly, to do with that, is one example.

The article above says that China use different algorithms there for TT so it is helpful for children’s development. They are peddling addictive, concentration lowering crap to children around the world, but protecting their own children.

Why are we allowing this? Why are we not protecting our children too? The science is there.

And AIBU to think that we are at risk, as a country, of raising a generation that will be less well adapted and more vulnerable in the future to a hostile take over?

If it’s irrelevant why use it as an example? Along with Pinterest - what is it they’re doing that companies like tik tok should be replicating?

It’s not about being wrong - data protection laws apply to all. There aren’t rules based on age. And, and this really is the glaring issue, many of the issues generated by social media are because parents facilitate children breaching controls.

As if by magic. This is the issue. Not China.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5042803-turning-the-wifi-off?page=3

See. You just want a ding dong. You are being goady and misinterpreting what I’ve said.

I used it as an example of good practice that could help guide policy. It’s an example of a company creating applications that don’t just focus on profit but create helpful nudges etc that help people that are using the app to make better choices. The what isn’t relevant.

I’m not deliberately doing anything. Can you please stop accusing me of being goady. You are assuming some weird agenda that doesn’t exist.

i don’t see what those companies are doing, hence I am asking, what is it that they’re doing that encourages making better choices. I genuinely have no idea.

please, and this is a genuine plea, if something isn’t relevant or comparable please don’t introduce it to the discussion.

But my point still stands that companies could be forced to be more mindful of the wellbeing of the end user (adult or child, but particular children).

When accounts are set up, it could be the rule that there has to be a page where you are told that the app isn’t suitable for children and why and takes you through some education about this before you agree. Basically creating friction and providing education.

Most companies won’t do this unless their hand is forced.

As I said, what is relevant is that some companies do create apps that put in elements that are geared towards helping the user rather than profits first. Creating friction that helps the end user. The ‘what’ of that is irrelevant. What’s relevant is some companies do it. I’m not an expert in how it’s done or what specifically could help. I just know it’s a problem and that it’s mostly profit first, people second. That shouldn’t be the case.

So after you enter date of birth there should be some kind of warning about it being dangerous for children? Even though in order to get that far someone has lied?

I honestly don’t know what controls monzo or Pinterest have put in place that helps the user ahead of profit. I am not being difficult - this is completely new to me hence asking. what is it that they’ve done that prioritises people ahead of profit?

I didn’t say specifically for children. It could be generic education. Transparency about the use of dopamine hits etc.

like I’ve said many times I DONT KNOW WHAT THE ANSWERS ARE. I’m just certain more can and should be done and that COULD include;

More education for parents
Legislation to force companies to put things in place to protect service users.

Im not discussing this with you because you are cherry picking what you respond to and misinterpreting what I’m saying.

The solution isn’t my job. It’s not my expertise. I see the problem. Daily.

You don’t think legislation can help. I do. We just need to agree to disagree.

Ok. This is my last post. You could google it but;

My friend was saying that he had been helping Monzo to create systems that created friction and nudges that help users to save and not make impulsive purchases. Using nudge theory to encourage saving and careful spending and creating friction to do to the same.

Quick search as I’ve forgotten what I read ages ago: “Pinterest has implemented features like emotional well-being activities, which provide resources and exercises to help users manage stress and improve their mood. Additionally, Pinterest has taken steps to combat misinformation and promote positive content, creating a more supportive and healthy environment for users.”

TO BE CLEAR I am not saying these are similar to TT or that these are the solutions, but are examples of good practice and show it can be done.

Apologies. I did mention children. But I think it could be generic information and specifically why it’s worse for children.

I didn’t say legislation couldn’t help. I said I don’t see what more can be done.

Sude note, dopamine hits aren’t evidenced as harmful.

Dopamine hits aren’t harmful no. I don’t believe I said that. But companies do use knowledge of how our reward centres in our brain work to keep us engaged. My point is that there could be legislation to make companies share this kind of information in a transparent way. But again, I don’t know if this would be the answer. Not my area of expertise.

And you don’t think forcing parents to facilitate lying isn’t sending a clear message?

What?!!!

In order to create a social media account you have to lie about age. This is the overriding issue. In order for teenagers to be exposed it requires multiple poor decisions by parents. Why are we assuming these parents aren’t in control?

Most apps are 13+. So you are right that parents giving their <13 kids access are having to lie about their age.

In my experience parents don’t fully understand the impact. We have gone out of our way as a family to research it. Most don’t.

Adolescence is a critical period for brain development too, so the current restrictions are not enough IMO.

Social norms are to break them. So many parents allow access to over 18 games. They are surprised when I advise against it as they just don’t get the impact. But in my personal life it happens too. Some well educated, caring and thoughtful parents allow it. And loads of sugar/UPF etc.

I think we need to educate parents more but also the addictive nature of games/apps/devices needs consideration too. I think I’d probably go as far to say that we need separate apps for under 18s that are built differently but we are a long way off that.

So I’m a box set binge monster at times. Some of my streaming apps just auto play the next episode with no stop. One or two will cut out every now and then and ask me if I’m still watching. It’s a helpful nudge that reminds me to get a life. That kind of friction and care for the user could be legislated for. There could be industry standards.

But like I say, this is way beyond my area of expertise. It just seems like common sense to me.

Apps for under 18s are built differently. But as you’ve already says parents allow children access regardless of age. Which brings us full circle to this being a parenting issue. Not a government one.

No. I mean an app for 13+ to 16/18. But again. I’m not sure this would be a solution. It’s just an example.

With regard to it being a parenting issue. I’ve said it’s both/and, not either/or. Lots of things are both.

Governments cannot legislate anymore than they have in relation to children. Anything done would have to apply to all. Adults and children.

How do you know it’s gone as far as it can? As a parent I don’t think so. I feel that it’s left to me mostly and we pay for a guardian service that would be unaffordable to lots of families.

Because the current controls are being bypassed by parents. If parents aren’t engaging with it is currently available making them stricter won’t address it. Those parents who do do. Those parents who don’t won’t suddenly start.

Take online safety - do you know what parental attendance and engagement is like? The ones who engage are already on it. The ones who aren’t don’t.

I agree that we can’t rely on parents. There are a multitude of factors that get in the way and more education is needed. But even then lots of parents will bypass the controls. That’s why I think the industry needs more regulation.

One example could be legislation that restricts or discourages the use of design elements known to increase addiction, such as infinite scrolling, autoplay, and rewards systems based on intermittent reinforcement. Like my example of the ‘are you still watching?’ pause rather than constant auto play is a small example.

But as I’ve said, I’m not an expert in this stuff. Just child development and wellbeing.