hey they can still use networked communication - e.g. whatsapp, signal, etc. This ban is only concerning the following services

Facebook Instagram Threads Kick Reddit Snapchat TikTok Twitch X (formerly Twitter) YouTube

▲

drunner 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I was all for this legislation, thinking the positives outweighed the cost, but after reading the list of affected services, I now disagree.

Why didn't they just legislate that all social media apps content must be like Facebook in 2005. No recommendations, chronological timeline only, and you only see posts from users you explicitly added. That would have benefited everyone forever, and not enabled some small subset of apps to collect your govt id or the law to be irrelevant when the next popular social network comes along.

They effectively banned only the popular cigarette brands, instead of regulating nicotine.

If services would argue this would make them all the same, then add a clause where the user can opt in to have an algorithm shove content at them like now if they are over 18.

This way everyone can use the basic service for true socializing, but the harmful stuff is actually regulated out by default.

Too much money etc for this to ever happen, but geez they could have done a lot better.

▲

stOneskull 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

yeah, there's always 4chan.. and rumble might get an uptick in users today, where they can view all the content youtube has banned

▲

ekianjo 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Oh, and how do you know it will stop there? Control freaks don't stop at the first step.

▲

DocTomoe 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

First they came for Facebook, and I didn't protest, I was not on facebook.

Here's what's going to happen next: Whatsapp/signal/telegram groups will become wildly popular. Which gives the wannabe-fascists the excuse to ban those as well 'for the children'.

We've seen this salami tactic often enough to know the pattern.

▲

SiempreViernes 3 days ago | parent [-]

You are too modest! You should start your poem denouncing those pesky spam filters than hinders the honest viagra pill salesmen! Then you could regret your inaction when google downweighted zit-popping videos, and maybe you have reached the point where it becomes reasonable to regret losing Facebook the genocide facilitator.

	▲	DocTomoe 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		There is a qualitative distinction between 'I filter for myself what I don't want to see' and 'The State decides what everyone is allowed to see.' Not too sure about those zit-popping videos. But in my time, we had rotten.com - so I might be immunized to that kind of stuff. Personally, I find a honest zit-popping video no worse than yet another AI voice going on and on about some non-topic, clearly written by AI as well. I don't seek out either, but the zit-popping at least is over after 10 seconds. But that's Google curating content. State censorship is something else entirely. Once justified "for the children" or "for security", it never stops at the first target. It grows, layer by layer. We’ve watched that pattern repeat for centuries across every medium humans have ever invented. Facebook, the genocide facilitator? If we are honest, so has the printing press. Let's ban letters, they have facilitated genocide. The printing press spread enlightenment, propaganda, revolutions, and atrocities. The State tried to control that too. It failed every time. It will fail with the net, for young people and for old ones. Repression never works long-term, it always creates pressure that eventually breaks the system that produced it. Historically, societies tend to get worse before they correct themselves, because authoritarian overreach generates exactly the instability it claims to prevent. Jefferson’s warning about the recurring need to renew freedom wasn’t a call for violence - it was an observation about the cyclical nature of power, repression, and reform. Every attempt to restrict communication has eventually collapsed under its own contradictions, and the internet will be no exception.