434
Teen Boys Are Using Meta Glasses to Harass and Bully Girls at High Schools and Middle Schools (futurism.com)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
155 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 month ago (6 children)

How about both? They’re not mutually exclusive. You can acknowledge that there are systems in plays incentivizing the behavior while also holding the people who do the behavior accountable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (5 children)

    Even if they're not mutually exclusive, the lion's share is systemic. For parents that can mean access to healthcare, financial security, access to childcare, access to a good school, and a slew of other things. If people were able to change their finances reliably, there would be no poor people, etc etc.. What's the point of holding someone "accountable" when that maybe changes one or two parents. Even given a 100% reform rate (since I assume you want correction as opposed to punishment) you have to a) wait for deviance to occur b) catch the deviance c) take corrective action with both the parent and the child. Even if we assume only 1% of parents raise children that behave badly, there are two billion children in the world. If I were going to allocate resources to hold people accountable or to provide some sort of actual assistance to parents, 100% is going to the latter. So it's not that it's one or the other, it's that one is useful and one is not.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (4 children)

    When it comes to Meta glasses specifically if you have the means to buy them you likely have all the things you mentioned by virtue of being able to buy Meta glasses. Again, they should be made illegal and society needs to have some serious discussions about privacy on the internet. But I can also think that if you buy your kids these glasses, especially if you’re aware your kid has bullied/harassed others in the past, you should be held accountable. Shame and publicity work for a reason. If more parents are judged publicly for their poor parenting choices and purchases, they are less likely to buy said things. Again, both.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    You think the rich parents that will give their children these glasses are capable of shame? I don't. Some will even be proud of it (see pandemic behavior, cybertruck owners, etc).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Depends on who’s doing the shaming. Some of them are really touchy about their image, especially when it’s people they actually know or they think are on a similar “level” or is an authority figure in their eyes. Considering social media can be very important to some of these people( and can act as an equalizer in terms of the public rallying around a topic against those in power), spreading awareness and making it very unpopular to own or wear these things will likely affect at least some of them. It also will address the systemic part by making the working class aware and thus making the politicians aware that the working class is aware. If politicians realize that supporting surveillance tech like this will cost them voters and power they may be willing to do something about it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    After seeing how poorly people behaved during the pandemic, I just can't believe that shaming is a useful tool. Antivaxxers were proud they were putting others at risk. That was not a small number of people. I knew individuals that could not even be shamed by those closest to them. I do not believe in shame as a tool for social change and the vague points you make about it do not fit with my actual experience. Not for individuals and sure as hell not for corporations or politicians.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    I think it depends on the person and the situation. I was more thinking about canceling. While I don’t think harassing people or sending them death threats is a good thing, canceling is essentially shaming. It can severely affect certain powerful or popular people’s ability to grow and maintain an audience. Granted, there’s plenty of problems with it, not every person who is canceled deserves to be, and it may endear some people to the one being canceled, but it can limit someone’s ability to spread harmful ideas to new people. Again, I don’t think we should harass people. But I don’t think holding people accountable for their actions never works. Hence my point about doing both.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent