The internet was better before ignorant takes like yours showed up. Facebook, tik-tok, and the like invented nothing that wasn’t done better previously. Are you really so addicted to all this Web 2.0 non-sense? Of course you are. Get help.
What in god’s green earth about limitting social media usage for everyone on a daily time-use basis implies anything about targetting marginalized groups? Things that are detrimental to mental health, like excessive social media consumption, aren’t magically less-so for marginalized groups.
If anything, such media is a distraction and pacifier of sorts.
If you read what I wrote, open source social media is also easier to consume and interact with in the manner I described. Usenet, e-mail, IRC, forums, even private messaging and group-chats are both healthier to interact with and less demanding of our time than “services” that bury the content we want to see like facebook and the rest.
Every single one is still around and in use by the same people who built the internet and others who get more done for themselves and open-source projects than you or I or most of us on Lemmy and the more modern de-federated schemes.
Even if they somehow limit time spent on forums, mastodon, whatever, content can be saved for later consumption, and responses composed for later posting. Instant access to the latest tweet or tiktok isn’t helping anyone but advertisers.
Limitting time is nothing like limitting speech. If I want to write a lengthy post, I can write it off-line, copy-and-paste without wasting quota time or whatever. Same goes for reading lengthy content; Copy/Paste(or print2pdf) and save for later.
Missing the latest short-form content garbage would be a boon for those who otherwise insist on wasting their time, mental and emotional energy like so.
Might as well call peak usage rates for electricity “fashy shit”. Excessive social media usage helps no-one. In fact its the opposite, and particularly so for marginalized groups.
The difference between workable and non-workable usually boils down to whether I can understand each step and how they arrived at their solution(that is, can I fix my own fuck-up if I miss a step or impliment it wrong for my own situation), which I will know pretty quickly. That said, with my limitted knowlege, I can still spot the 50% that have no chance in hell of working pretty quickly.
OTOH, if a solution is succinct, upvoted, and still looks wrong, I’m at least going to look into the problem further with that as a reference point before I write it off completely.
Worst thing about this is it stops at “non-adults”, and puts the burden in individual services(which would be un-workable, yes) rather than ISPs(which have the means). God forbid we do anything to help society as a whole.
Up-shot: The sooner it comes for minorities, the sooner it comes for all of us worthless fleshbags.
… and who is going to tell someone that when they’ve socially isolated themselves by taking time off for an extended period?
The only time I’ve seen a therapist more often than weekly or bi-weekly was in a short stint in rehab. No way, no how, does normal therapy replace daily contact with others.
Also, most people aren’t assertive, informed, or motivated enough to seek a second professional opinion, and that’s before we throw grief into the equation. Congrats on describing many therapists with you last line as well.
That one word is doing a lot of heavy lifting on its own, until what follows contradicts what you’ve said. If you don’t have the words, a therapist’s questions and prompts and what-not aren’t really doing all that much to break the silence, nor to promote healing until you’re ready to participate.
BTDT. Having a routine is conditioning we do to ourselves, but for so much of life, its the most useful thing ever for so long as we can keep it up.* The trick is to not be further hurt by guilt for failing to continue with it or get back to it quickly enoug/“just so”.
… and/or aren’t planning to go. I would love to get through Bloomington, IN without seeing the location of every Liquor store dotting my navigation screen. Can’t be personalized, as I basically never visit Liquor stores.
“getting into bed together” and “careful who you get into bed with” are so old/common in the business world that its hard for me to relate to most of the comments on this one.
Even meeting the spouse first is nothing new in the world of business or “high-society” contacts. The only thing new here is that he got his own bed and didn’t have to mention the couch or leave it even more vague.
… but I’m not here to sympathise with either of them?
I don’t disagree with your assessment per se, but ethics-wise I’m liking Chad, or anywhere else that actively takes in large numbers of immigrants/refugees.
I didn’t come here to criticize most countries like so, but when you hit the nail on the head like that …
That said, there are plenty of people who should be willing to all but sell their souls to get out, if they could only see and acknowlege what’s coming for them. I’m not here to tell anyone besides magats “get out of my country”, but if enough privileged people like me lead by example, maybe more will get the message.
By definition, polycules include people who all members are cool with, and exclude everyone else. If a member has cancer or is otherwise already immunocomprimised, excluding people with STI’s makes sense.
Get this straight: Private Messaging and e-mail are not Social Media in the context of this law, and neither are phone calls or texts. Give me an hour, and I can download enough pages of whatever I like to keep me busy for a week.
Seeking validation from strangers in real-time is bad for your mental health. Yes, even for the home-bound. That said, your argument would probably win-out in court, so there would have to be exceptions. “Adult” is still too broad of an exception on its own IMHO.