tifik

Technical and legal norms are implementation of social norms. “obviously everybody knows that you are supposed to do it that way” doesnt hold up well at court, or during an argument about any decision that costs big bucks.

I think it will be downvoted for being unnecessarily inflamatory.

Replying to myself in case my point isnt clear - Im postulating that monogamy being some sort of “default” is inevitable, given enough time to evolve, regardless of how you setup the starting parameters.

All good points, but this doesnt really answer my question. If we imagine this hypothetical non-monogamous society, with no social constructs incentivizing monogamy, jealousy being in human nature would remain a driver towards monogamy. I imagine historically this is how most religions arrived at propagating monogamy. In christianity and judaism for both genders, or in islam for female monogamy, as jealousy was such a common driver of conflict that may even escalate into wars. Enforcing monogamy as the moral choice has some merit, if it avoids bloodshed, though obviously ideally people capable of being in non-monogamous relationships shouldnt be punished for being in one.

These are good insights, but I meant how do you adress it within the concept of a non monogamous society.

How do you address jealousy? Im very much on board with the idea in general, and have given it quite a bit of thought, but I’ve never been fully sold on the idea that jealousy is fully based on social constructs

And that is where details matter. You can implement age verification in such a way that no data gets transmitted anywhere. Ofc I wouldn't expect Meta to not take a chance of collecting even more user data and blame a law for doing it, but if the law is written well enough, it won't mandate a specific method. If it does, definitely oppose it imo.

All of the kids will get a fake account and a VPN? Putting barriers in place will likely have some effect in the intended direction.

> This assumes that it will actually solve the problem anyway

I wouldn't expect any policy to _solve_ a problem in such a way that the problem completely disappears from the world, much like theft being illegal doesn't eliminate theft, but it sure distinctiveness it for a lot of people.

The problem isn't an individual kids phone. It's their peers devices, or other ways they can explore the internet that isn't under their guardians control. This is a systemic issue that requires systemic approach. I am not making any claims about the qualities of currently discussed systemic solutions, but I do want to point out that the 'parents can just' argument is missing the mark.

I assumed 'this' refers to the title. That may have been incorrect.

I don't have the data but I don't think most people look past the title.

The idea is that each subagent is focused on a specific part of the problem and can use its entire context window for a more focused subtask than the overall one. So ideally the results arent conflicting, they are complimentary. And you just have a system that merges them.. likely another agent.

Yes, and? Without it, the total paid would be at least the same or more.

I was wondering if it's just me. I am using Brave on iOS with all the possible blockers enabled, so I'm not surprised when some website doesn't work well. Instagram literally freezes solid after 5-15s of being on the website, so I usually only quickly scan the top 2-3 posts in the feed. I only follow people I know personally, so this is usually enough to do once or twice a day and stay up to date. If I see a close friend posted a story I kinda want to see then it usually takes two or three hard closes of the browser to actually see it. Sucks, but sucks less than being mental gamed into doomscrolling every time I get an app notification.

I like that for this brief moment we actually have a competitive market working in favor of consumers. I ditched my Claude subscription in favor of Gemini just last week. It won't be great when we enter the cartel equilibrium.