Comment Re:This just further isolates kids (Score 1) 113
I'm still not certain what the "social media" definition is in this or other legislative definitions. Would Usenet count? Would Slashdot? Would some random Phpbb board for bird watchers set up in 2005?
Personally, I've drawn the limit at "algorithms", meaning you get some sort of "feed" pushed down your throat. Whatsapp is not social media - yes, they have channels where you can broadcast but I think the app doesn't try to lure you in. Youtube is kind of borderline - if you log in, it definitely pushes something into your feed, but on the other hand, you do not need to log in, and then you just get "trending" videos. Facebook, Linkedin, X etc definitely count.
In our family, the 10-year old gets access to Whatsapp because all friends have it too. I don't see what would be the point of removing that access. Most of those friendships have formed in school, and when some families have moved away that way they can still keep in touch. They also play Minecraft and Roblox and chat during gameplay. Minecraft is a no-brainer - it's just multiplayer Lego set. Of Roblox I'm not sure but I sure as hell will not be allowing Persona to take some age-verification picture if that ever becomes mandatory.
Also, I can't follow the "no smartphones for kids" train of thought. The smartphone is *easier* to lock down that a dumb (or "feature") phone even with standard Google Family Link tools. Just disable everything except a whitelist. And if child learns how to unlock bootloader and root the phone to get rid of the restrictions, I think I'd feel a bit proud - as long as it's not just done by a geek friend of a friend. Have to at least make some effort...