Source: https://xcancel.com/vxunderground/status/2032600868005310638#m

Yeah, so basically the current prevailing schizo internet theory is that AI nerds have destroyed the internet and created infinite spam.

The advertisement goons are now incapable of determining who is a bot and who is an actual human. The advertisement goons no longer want to pay as much to social media networks.

Social media networks, in full blown panic of losing potential revenue, decided to lobby governments saying “we gotta protect the kids! ID everyone to protect the kids from pedophiles!”.

The social media networks know this doesn’t really protect kids. But, it does two things (and a third accidentally).

  1. They now can identify who is human and who is AI slop machine, or enough to appease the advertisement goons

  2. Advertising to children is a general no-no from politicians, or something, so with ID verification they can say with confidence they’re not advertising to children because it’s been ID verification. Basically, they can weed out the children and focus on advertising to adults

  3. The feds can now tell who is human and who is AI slop. This inadvertently helps them with tracking people and serving fresh daily dumps of propaganda, or whatever they want to do.

It’s a win-win-win for advertisers, social media networks, the government, and any business which does data collections.

It fucks over everyone else.

Chat, I’m not going to lie to you. This is an extremely good conspiracy schizo theory and I unironically believe it.

  • BeN9o@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6·
    8 days ago

    “Advertising to Children is a general no-no…”

    Uhh what? Advertising to children is like no1 priority. That’s why Kim K etc is in fortnite, happy meals are bad food aimed at kids and of course standard TV adverts can be heavily aimed at kids, even tho its the parents spending the money.

    • new_world_odor@lemmy.world
      3·
      8 days ago

      Advertising to children is significantly more tightly regulated, for the very reason that they’re so damn thirsty for it.

    • damnthefilibuster@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      8 days ago

      Facebook has known since over a decade that under 13s are on their networks and instead of booting them, the CEO (whoever he is) decided to make the platforms more addictive to under 13s. Real quote from the LA court case going on right now.

      Also, the new CEO of Xbox Gaming is ex-AI Head of Microsoft and the ex-Head of under-13 policy at Facebook. So she did everything the CEO (whoever he is) asked her to do, including making the platforms more addictive and pushing back on govt intervention.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        1·
        8 days ago

        Not saying it’s right, but only appropriate things can be advertised to children, so in the UK that’s no junk food for example

        When was the last time any company got prosecuted for violating that? And was the fine less than the profit they made by violating the law?

        • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          2·
          8 days ago

          The US doesn’t allow cigarettes to be advertised to children or anywhere where they might see it. This was a Clinton administration thing. That’s why the Winston Cup became the Nextel Cup in NASCAR as just one for instance.

          • damnthefilibuster@lemmy.worldEnglish
            01·
            8 days ago

            And so JUUL, which is made from all the main ingredients of a cigarette, is not a cigarette? And it’s not advertised heavily on social media like Snapchat, where most youth are? Instead of the fucking nascar?

            • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              1·
              8 days ago

              Unfortunately we live in a time when if the law doesn’t specifically call out something then it doesn’t apply. So no, as far as US law is concerned, Juuls are not cigarettes just like Uber isn’t a taxi service and YouTube isn’t a broadcaster.

        • jedibob5@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          8 days ago

          What? Tobacco is like, the one thing that actually has extremely stringent advertising regulations in the US. When vaping products like Juul came around, they were able to exploit loopholes in those laws, but I think those have pretty much been patched up by now.

    • starblursd@lemmy.zipEnglish
      1·
      8 days ago

      Data collection* from children is a general No-No but with this they don’t have to collect the data to know they’re a child and can now specifically target them without having to collect data first. Thereby avoiding coppa fines