Let your Congress-critters know this is not the right thing to do.

  • gamer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    1 year ago

    I want to sponsor an act called like MURDER DEFENSELESS CHILDREN AND BANISH THEIR SOULS TO HELL ACT, but it’s just a tax cut for rich people.

  • EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    All the politicians that took multiple trips to Jeffery Epstein’s little playhouse want to protect the children!

    Won’t someone please protect the heckin’ children?!

  • roguetrick@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I want them to pass an act called “Stop Protecting Kids on Social Media.” It can be part of the FUCKTHEMKIDS omnibus.

  • imgonnatrythis@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Yikes, please click on the link and do submit to your reps. Very easy to do. This kind of save the children labeling almost always gets voted in, so this is an uphill battle, but this is clearly a power grab, don’t let them take this, the implications are quite frightening. If policies like fosta / sesta can become reality, this can too. Things are degrading rapidly, fight it!

    • buddhabound@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      One of my Senators is Marsha Blackburn, whose photo is used in this cal to action. She will tell me that I’m stupid and should support the bill, and then I’ll be on her GD mailing list again (it is very difficult to get removed from that list).

        • buddhabound@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m just now learning about SimpleLogin. Something to look into when I don’t feel like I’ve just exited a 10 hour nightmare after work.

      • imgonnatrythis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Should be filterable though. It’s a very small vocal minority that even uses these automated letters to contact legislators. These don’t go unnoticed. May feel like a drop in a bucket but I think it’s best to go down fighting.

    • cryball@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s a job for the parents though isn’t it? And for early teenagers people seem to forget what positive influence the internet could have on their lives. Eg. many IT workers started fiddling around with stuff when they were quite young.

    • kiiada@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Maybe stop for a second and consider how this bill is meant to act in concert with library book bans and cuts to school curriculum. Conservatives are coordinating bills and policies to cut off access to important knowledge about marginalized communities.

      The only way the far-right can build a young political base is if they can keep entire generations ignorant and uneducated, and unfortunately kids in red districts can’t rely on getting the education they need to be informed citizens from schools.

      • DarthBueller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Precisely this. Just like there’s solid research showing the bad effects of social media on kids generally, there’s solid research showing the positive effects of social media in the case of LGBTQI+ youth. This is designed to let oppressively religious families cut off their queer children from “the world” and from the idea that “it gets better.” Kids are gonna die.

    • MrLuemasG@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To clarify, I 100% think this bill is bad for adults, privacy, and the internet.

      However…

      “The end result of this law would likely be that a huge number of young people—particularly the most vulnerable—would lose access to social media platforms, which can play a critical role for young people in accessing resources and support in a wide variety of circumstances”

      Social Media has a documented, well-studied, negative effect on young people’s mental health. We really could and should be doing more as a society to prevent young people from using it / pressuring social media platforms to fix the inherently negative issues with social media. This bill isn’t the answer, but acting like kids and teens should have free reign of web apps that are known to be bad for them isn’t the answer either.

      • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Their parents should fucking parent them then. If my parents didn’t want me exposed to something they didn’t let me have it. Stop giving your kids mobile devices and letting them loose on the internet and maybe they won’t turn out so fucked up.

  • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Absolutely nothing hypocritical about politicians who are willing to sacrifice literally everyone outside of the people in their family wanting to ahem SaVe ThE kIdS. /s

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is this one like KOSA meant to target transgender content and drag queens because that material (and specifically that material) is too spicy for America?

    Both the measures suck and are meant to defang the internet since they don’t like the public talking to each other so much, but the the US Senator who sponsored KOSA admitted it was specifically meant to censor the existence of LGBT+ folk, specifically trans folk.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    At what point do we say “Screw it”, let Congress pass all the bills to wreck the internet, and then build a better one?

    • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Unless you intend to move out of their jurisdiction, the law will probably remain the same for your New Internet too.

    • chakan2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Congress is going to say “Screw it” and pass what they want anyway.

      • zobatch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If by “pass what they want” you mean “continue doing nothing” then I’m in agreement.

    • MrLuemasG@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      How exactly does one build a “better one” that doesn’t automatically get included in the coverage of bills like this?

        • Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          How does I2P work? Is it some peer to peer network on IP or something?

          I’m making a decentralized sharing protocol, that could be a test-bed for “a new internet”. Not really battle hardened but works, tell me if you’re interested!

    • xfint@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Long past time to do it. It’s not even congress but the market share of the internet has been centralizing around the handful of FAANG or whatever acronym. Unfortunately too much of the tech nerd population have been seduced by the dark side. A reconstructed world wide web would be very hard to gain enough traction without enough nerds backing it.