boublepop
Joined 6 years ago
Joined 6 years ago
Yes, there’s a lot there to be worried about.
The reason child labor is illegal is not because we’re under the wrong assumption that work experience itself is bad for them.
But if LEGO started coming with lottery tickets in the kids sets, had adds for exploitative devs that ran real businesses with 7year olds on payroll in “pretend money” that can be exchanged on black sites that LEGO approved of by not taking any actions, well you start to get in to problems.
The thing is that Roblox is not just a unsuspecting pawn here. They are deliberately fostering this, they know about the toxic development environment, so they closed their own forums to avoid legal implications, they knowing promote gambling to kids, they allow sites that exchange in game currency for money because it helps grow their game.
> It also lets kids learn a lot of entrepreneurial skills if they have that bent, which I view as a massive plus.
I’m sure the experience of working as an underage kid for a grown man sexually targeting underage girls will very valuable in the startup world, especially the part where the company gets informed and doesn’t do anything more than the bare minimum because his child labor ring is making them money.
It’s a game for kids, but it’s not made or owned by kids. We can hold them to a higher bar of responsibility.
It’s really held back society that we haven’t been able to verify diplomas issued by centralized trusted institutions in a decentralized trustless fashion. /s
So natural question, how long until they start squeezing more money out of users and how severe will it be for hobbyists and small companies?
It feels wrong to call it misuse when you’re literally using it the way Tesla has previously, is currently, and will continue to market it.
There’s no grand conspiracy or evil masterminds here, and teens aren’t being exploited. It’s just marketing targeting the target audience.
If we bought into the premise that adverts for teens where bad for them or that Facebook itself is harmful. We should not be discussing which ways they carried out their advertisement, we should be discussing how the government outlawed all forms of advertisement, print and media for teens and children and shut Facebook down along with all other social media.
If you buy the Mona Lisa and get a certificate of ownership with a reference to the painting, you would not say that this certificate was art.
Movies that have strategic product placement isn’t “mostly product placement free” it’s just plain marketing, and should own up to it.
I don’t understand why it’s even there, it doesn’t seem to tie into anything and is a sharp contrast to the rest of the content which actually references studies and actual results, and then it just switches to “Oh, and there’s this product the owner claims works” seems very odd unless it’s a paid add, but it seems unlikely to be a paid add due to placement and context.
Throughout the pandemic numbers have reported how many people where hospitalized with Covid. Because that is the important number to be concerned about, since this is the number that is pressuring the hospital system. This articles is Henrik Qi’s personal “gotcha” saying “haha, I told you so, actually only 3/4 of those hospitalizations are because of covid!!” And then trying to paint a picture of the media collectively having failed the readers for not “discovering” this earlier.
Now this is a lie for two reasons, it implies incorrectly that there was previously a statement that 100% the people in the hospital with covid where there solely because of covid, which was never the case. And secondly it is a lie because the hints that covid is actually 27% less severe is an implicit accusation that someone who has covid and heart failure and is admitted does not stress the system exactly as much as someone admitted only because they have covid.
The punkis wasn’t lied to by the government. The media didn’t fail the people. What actually happened was that the most important number was reported accurately and now Henrik Q finally got another number that he thinks is more important. Why does he think that one is more important? Because he doesn’t care about the healthcare system failing, what he cares about is only his personal risk of ending up hospitalized if he gets covid. And that’s fine, it’s not illegal to be selfish, but it’s not a failing of the government for not focusing on metrics you personally align with your own hypothesis.
It was quite clearly communicated and makes perfect sense that during covid we where looking at number of hospitalizations with covid compared to the capacity to support hospitalizations with covid, and lockdowns and other actions where planned based on ensuring those didn’t collide.
If the hospital system had broken down, it would have helped no one that Henrik could jog along and go “Well actually 27% of the people that can’t get treatment for covid or other illnesses only need that because of the other illness not because of covid”
Anyways I appreciate your perspective but I’ll stand by my viewpoint. The truth contained in this reporting is incidental to their agenda, it’s not the focus of it at all.
This doesn’t mean they don’t have truth in their reporting, only that whatever truth is there is accidental and just seen as a tool to get attention or exact revenge on the governments which he has a personal vendetta against.
https://youtu.be/vTMF6xEiAaY