It Bans Social Media While Embracing AI, Leaving Teens Disappointed

While someone in their 70s didn’t serve in World War II, this statement holds truth, as even the oldest Scepter Agerians were born post-war. Yet, a cultural link persists between this demographic and the era of Vera Lynn and the Blitz.

When discussing parents and technology, similar misconceptions arise. The prevailing belief is that social media and the internet are a realm beyond the understanding of parents, prompting calls for national intervention to shield children from tech giants. This month, Australia plans to outline its forthcoming restrictions. However, the parents of today’s teens are increasingly digitally savvy, having grown up in the age of MySpace and Habbo Hotel. Why have we come to think that these individuals can’t comprehend how their kids engage with TikTok and Fortnite?

There are already straightforward methods for managing children’s online access, such as adjusting router configurations or mandating parental approval for app installations. Yet politicians seem to believe these tasks require advanced technical skills, resulting in overly broad restrictions. If you could customize your Facebook profile in college, fine-tuning some settings shouldn’t be beyond reach. Instead of asking everyone to verify their age and identity online, why not trust the judgment of parents?


If you customized your Facebook page in university, you should be able to tweak a few settings

Failing to adapt to generational shifts can lead to broader issues. Like veterans who narrowly focus on historical battles from the past, there’s a risk of misdirecting attention. While lawmakers clamp down on social media, they’re simultaneously rushing to embrace AI technologies that rely on sophisticated language models, which significantly affect today’s youth, leaving educators pondering how to create ChatGPT-proof assignments.

Rather than issuing outright bans, we should facilitate open discussions about emerging technologies, encompassing social media, AI, and their societal implications while engaging families in the conversation.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Why Safety Bills in the US Didn’t Pass, Leaving Desperate Parents to Protect Their Children on Social Media

wHEN Congress was postponed to the holiday in December. This is a groundbreaking bill aimed at overhauling how technology companies protect the youngest users. The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) introduced in 2022 was intended to be a massive calculation for Big Tech. Instead, the bill waned and died in the House despite sailing through the Senate in July with a 91-3 vote.

Kosa is passionately defended by families who say children have fallen victim to the harmful policies of social media platforms, and advocates who say bills that curb the unidentified power of big technology have been postponed for a long time is. They are seriously disappointed that a strong chance to check out Big Technology has failed due to Congress' indifference. However, human rights groups argued that the law could have led to unintended consequences that impacted freedom of speech online.

What is the Kids Online Safety Act?

Kosa was introduced nearly three years ago in the aftermath of a bomb revelation by former Facebook employee Frances Haugen, and the extent to which the social media platform's impact on younger users. Platforms like Instagram and Tiktok would have required that children be affected through design changes and address online risks to allow younger users to opt out of algorithmic recommendations.

“This is a basic product praise bill,” said Alix Fraser, director of the Council on Responsible Social Media Issues. “It's complicated because the internet is complex and social media is complex, but essentially it's just an effort to create basic product driving standards for these companies.”

The central and controversial element of the bill is its “duty of care” clause, declaring that businesses “have an obligation to use the platform to act in the best interests of minors,” and the regulatory authority It has declared it open to interpretation by They would have also requested that the platform implement measures to reduce harm by establishing “safeguards for minors.”

Critics argued that the lack of clear guidance on what constitutes harmful content encourages businesses to filter content more aggressively, resulting in unintended consequences for free speech. Delicate but important topics such as gun violence and racial justice can be considered potentially harmful and may subsequently be ruled out by the corporation itself. These censorship concerns are particularly prominent in the LGBTQ+ community, saying that opponents of the Kosa could be disproportionately affected by conservative regulators and reduce access to critical resources.

“Using Kosas we see a truly intentional but ultimately ambiguous bill that requires online services to adopt online services to take unspecified actions to keep children safe. A policy analyst at the Center for Democracy Technology, who opposes the law and receives money from technology donors such as Amazon, Google, and Microsoft.

The complex history of the Kosa

When the bill was first introduced, over 90 human rights groups signed letters against it, highlighting these and other concerns. In response to such criticism, the bill's author published a revision in February 2024. Most notably, the state attorney general changed the enforcement of its “duty of care” provisions to the Federal Trade Commission. Following these changes, many organizations, including the Glaad, the Human Rights Campaign and the Trevor project, have withdrawn their opposition, saying the amendments “significantly reduce the risk of the matter.” [Kosa] It has been misused to suppress LGBTQ+ resources and to curb young people's access to online communities. ”

However, other civil rights groups have maintained their opposition, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the ACLU and the future battle, calling Kosa a “censorship bill” that harms vulnerable users and freedom of speech. They argued that the duty-of-care provision could easily be weaponized by conservative FTC chairmen against LGBTQ+ youth, as well as the state attorney general. These concerns are reflected in the appointment of Republican Andrew Ferguson, Trump's FTC chairman; Who said in the leaked statement He had planned to use his role to “fight the trans agenda.”

Concerns about how Ferguson will manage online content are “what LGBTQ youth wrote and called Congress hundreds of times over the past few years in this fight,” says Saraphilips of the Future Fight. Ta. “The situation they were afraid of has come to fruition. Anyone who ignores it is really just putting their heads in the sand.”

Opponents say that even if KOSA doesn't pass, they've already achieved a calm effect on content available on certain platforms. recently Report User MAG has found that hashtags for LGBTQ+-related topics are classified as “sensitive content” and are restricted from search. Laws like Kosa, Bhatia of the Center for Democracy Technology, said it doesn't take into account the complexity of the online landscape, and it's likely that the platform will lead preemptive censorship to avoid litigation.

“Children's safety holds an interesting and paradoxical position in technology policy, where children benefit greatly from the internet, as well as vulnerable actors,” she said. . “Using policy blunt instruments to protect them can often lead to consequences that don&#39t really take this into consideration.”

Supporters will make backlash at Kosa an aggressive lobbying from the tech industry, but fight for the future – two top opponents – EFF will be supported by large tech donors Not there. Meanwhile, the large tech companies have been split up by KOSA, with X, SNAP, Microsoft and Pinterest quietly supporting the bill, Meta and Google.

Skip past newsletter promotions

“The Kosa was a very robust law, but what's more robust is the power of big technology,” Fraser is the power of problem 1. “They hired all the lobbyists in town to take it down, and they succeeded with it.”

Fraser added that supporters are disappointed that Kosa didn&#39t pass, but “will not take a break until federal law is passed to protect children online.”

Potential revival of Kosa

Besides Ferguson as FTC Chairman, it is unclear what the changing composition of the new Trump administration and Congress will mean for the future of Kosa. Trump has not directly expressed his views on Kosa, but some of his close circles are Revealed support After last minute amendments to the 2024 bill Promoted by Elon Musk&#39s X.

The death of the Congress in Kosa may seem like the end of a winding and controversial path, but defenders on both sides of the fight say it&#39s too early to write legislative obituaries.

“We shouldn&#39t expect the Kosa to go quietly,” said Prem Trivedi, policy director at the Institute for Open Technology, which opposes Kosa. “Whether it&#39s being reintroduced or seeing if a different incarnation is introduced, it will continue to focus more broadly on online safety for children.”

Senator Richard Blumental, who co-authored the bill with Senator Marsha Blackburn, has promised to reintroduce it in future legislative sessions, and other defenders of the bill say they won&#39t give It’s.

“I want to talk about the worst days of their lives over and over again, in front of lawmakers, in front of staff, in front of the press, knowing something is known. I&#39ve worked with a lot of parents who think that, and to change,” Fraser said. “They don&#39t intend to stop.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is Leaving Job Seekers Feeling Excluded: “The Interviewer’s Voice Resembled Siri”

When Ty passed a phone interview with a financial/banking company last month, they thought it would be nothing more than a quick chat with a recruiter. When Ty answers the phone, he assumes the recruiter named Jamie is a human. But things have become robotic.

“The voice sounded like Siri,” said Tai, 29, who lives in the D.C. metropolitan area. “It was creepy.”

Ty realized they weren’t talking to a living, breathing human being. Their interviewer was an AI system and had a tendency to be quite rude. Jamie asked Ty all the right questions – what is your management style? Are you suitable for this role? – But she wouldn’t let Ty answer completely.

“After disconnecting me, the AI ​​responds, “Great!” Sounds good! perfection! ‘Move on to the next question,’ Tai said. “After the third or fourth question, the AI ​​paused for a moment and said the interview was complete and someone from the team would contact me later.” (Ty said his current employer We asked that our last names not be used because we do not know that they are looking for work.)

a investigation Resume Builder, released last summer, found that by 2024, 4 in 10 companies will be using AI to “converse” with candidates during interviews. Of these companies, 15% said hiring decisions are made without any human input.

Laura Michelle Davis I have written From CNET: “Today, it’s not uncommon for applicants to be rejected by robots in human resources departments before they even connect with a real human.” To make the grueling hiring process even more discouraging, many are worried that generative AI, which uses datasets to create text, video, audio, images, and even robot recruiters, will completely take over our jobs.But can AI help us? search Any new gigs in the meantime?

Source: www.theguardian.com