[abdel_nasser]

exactly. the equation has changed. people who dont fit in are now even more fucked. everyone is obligated to play this high stakes game that nobody asked for and that wasnt filtered through any kind of intelligent societal deliberation. nobody seems to be worried that kids make the rules in public schools, they bully each other viciously and kids who graduate from the system cant point to the country of portugal on a map. its full blown insanity.

[DrSiemer]

But most of them become very skilled in navigating the social media landscape, which is what actually matters to them.

And the people that don't fit in will usually put more energy in other ways to express themselves and have a much higher chance of becoming Truly Interesting People, if they make it through that pressure cooker.

It's tough and I'm glad I'm not a part of it, but it's not the end of all cohesion in society that some make it out to be.

[Gareth321]

That's kind of the issue. A lot of them are committing suicide. Many more end up permanently scarred. Mental health issues are no joke. The author, Haidt, will himself recommend the concept of anti-fragility. Which is essentially toughening kids through gradual and manageable amounts of adversity. Yet even he sees no value in social media for this process. In other words, social media is not a net good for kids. They don't end up more well-adjusted as human beings.

[Nextgrid]

Dealing with school bullies and other unpleasantness is a useful skill for adult life.

Dealing with the social media rat race is merely a "skill" to become a good little consumer to generate more "engagement" for the social media companies later in life.

[abdel_nasser]

they will be skilled at something although im not sure it will be anything to do with socializing. and saying that outcasts will just be more likely to blossom because of it is just speculation.

at a certain point in history man began to eat plants and adopt a sedentary agricultural lifestyle. there were many people who were made sick by eating plants and very little meat or fat. very, very sick. there are still echos of it in the population today. was it a positive thing for all the skills of the past to be thrown away and a large chunk of people to be sacrificed because they werent compatible with the new way? sometimes a societal shift eliminates an entire class of people. youre wrong because you try to paint it like its zero sum for all classes of people. in reality, if it is zero sum its only because what we lose in sacrifice we gain in progress. can you believe this has been going on for ten thousand years and still it doesnt really have a name?