dsadsadsaddsa's comments

It would be interesting to see any data on the reasons why cars are scrapped. I have a hunch that electronic problems make up a large percentage of them, along with rust.

You're flagger. That's not a very interesting way to continue the discussion.

>that must take a bunch of energy - although presumably not as much as smelting steel?

You'd be surprised. Steel is 20MJ/kg[1], epoxy resin is 80MJ/kg[2]. FWIW, aluminium is 150MJ/kg.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy#In_common_mate... [2] https://compositesuk.co.uk/composite-materials/faqs/embodied...

That's correct, I am dismissing all use cases for Facebook. I too personally believe that the negatives (the constant drip of distraction fragments your time and ruins your attention span, you and all of the social capital you invest in the platforms are tiny cogs in M. Zuckerburg's machine, and it displaces the richer interactions we should experience) outweigh the positives.

The underlying cases are important, in fact very important. It's literally building your social life. But I personally think FB is a horrible tool to use for that.

I'm not saying it's easy. You might not get to meet the same people, or many at all. I think it's very different over in the US, as it seems your community groups are deeply entrenched in FB. But - if we think that's bad, someone has to make a start, by doing things another way.

You can disagree, and do your life as you see fit. And just hope you don't get banned from the platform that you have built your life on, but have absolutely no control over nor ability to plead your case.

Edit: A useful analogy might be - imagine a group who have changed their diet to consist almost entirely of candy samples from grocery shops. The response to those shops no longer giving away free candy should not be "but how will these people continue to get their nutrition from free candy?".

We are back to literally my first sentence of my first comment on this topic - women (and primary caregivers), are disproportionally affected by the charms of Facebook.

My wife went through a difficult personal journey around the time of the birth of our second child, when she decided to leave all social media. She decided that the benefits of this, which include a mind not addicted to the endless drip of social media, and also giving our kids a chance to live distraction-free, outweighed the disadvantages. Yes, giving up social media when your personal time is already incredibly disjointed and isolated is difficult - Facebook does provide some (at least in my wife's opinion) superficial and temporary benefits there.

>we'll have to come up with a good alternative if we want that to change

What was wrong with what we had before? That is, cohesive, in-person communities. Finding a FOSS alternative to Facebook, etc, as the solution to society's ills is, IMHO, missing the point.

This lady got banned from FB in the past few weeks. There's no comparison between "not being able to participate in group chats", and "I am legally unable to leave my house with my small children to meet people".

>youre banned by facebook from your communities

It's also fascinating to hear the words people use when FB has become so deeply ingrained in a culture's social fabric. My "community" does not exist on Facebook.

>being stay at home is way more isolating then pandemic was.

I could not disagree more, and my partner would say the same. What was so absolutely terrible about Covid lockdowns was that the few coping mechanisms available to primary caregivers in those early months and years of their childrens' lives (cafe visits with friends, having other people visit, going to the park and talking to others, etc etc) were completely removed. Covid lockdowns were near 100% isolating (and by design).

>The work from home of other partner is already massive change.

And this made it worse again! Not only does one partner have to try to look after young children literally isolated and not allowed to leave the house, but the other is supposed to sit staring at their computer and concentrate on work while ignoring them?

>It was going outside.

I don't know where you are from, but the Covid restrictions here were not only very strict, but people were incredibly compliant. The parks and such were empty! I was surprised. I had many lonely trips to our local playground with my little boy.

>Within young family that has that problem, this is a problem of one person. The rest of them dont even have to be aware.

I don't get what point you are trying to make. Yes, my family has a primary caregiver (like practically every other family). No, it's not me. However, this means I have an exceptionally good understanding of the very issue that is being discussed. I care deeply about the issues that person has as they raise our kids through their youngest ages, and I do whatever I can that is best for all the members of my family.

>Others had one close friends they met with regularly.

Good for them. Where I live, it was illegal to have other people in your houses until mid-2021. Cafes and other hospitality locations were closed for around the same time. My local playground was literally chained shut. Tell me it's fun meeting other families with babies in the winter in an empty field (it's not). Particularly when those other people spend the whole time dancing around you on tip-toes trying to keep the government-mandated 2m separation.

>And most seen socialization as important and moved it online.

There's the catch - I don't regard online-only interacting as "socialising". Most of what makes mere words into the all-encompassing experience known as "socialising" has been removed.

>For two years, those young families did a lot more socialization over internet

Tell me about it. The number of very young kids I now see clutching a phone or tablet is heart-breaking.

>If anything more socialization and coordination move there.

I very deliberately decided to reject that "new normal". Do you think that it's a good thing?

>Also, this is not so much about young families, this is about primary caregivers.

Do young families not have a primary caregiver? The effects we are talking about apply equally well to both, if you insist on making that distinction.

In some ways, someone starting afresh has a greater ability to decide exactly how they are going to build their new life, than someone who is already entrenched in their existing one.

For that matter, the vast majority of people don't have much "social capital". That's the very effect that Facebook so ruthlessly capitalises on - individually we don't have much power, and formerly we would have to expend considerable effort to maintain our social position and our local community. Personally, I see it as my moral responsibility to do my very best to be an engaging and interesting person in real life, and not to contribute any of that to the social quagmire of Facebook.

Also - moving to a new area, especially if you don't know anyone, is *hard*. Back in the bad old days before Facebook, leaving your community and anyone you knew was a huge decision that was not undertaken lightly. Is it essential that we have digital tools to make that easier?

There's a lot to unpack here.

First, this is a very clear example of how the manner in which Facebook operates has a very disproportionate effect on women. My wife followed me and gave up social media, and found it incredibly difficult, much more so than I. It was also notable that many people told me that I was doing the right thing, etc etc, but the general response my wife got was "how will anyone keep in touch with you?"

>It's not really an "optional" social network if large swathes of your social circle have started using it for essential life functions

Putting aside the trite observation that, for two years, young families being able to socialise was considered absolutely non-essential, Facebook is as essential as you make it. Ever since it took hold in universities, people have asked (with varying degrees of irony), "how do you exist without Facebook?". The answer is - just fine.

>and no, telling all the mums at the playground about how Facebook's ban policies are bad and we should all use the Fediverse instead is not going to work for the average person.

We generally don't mention it, and get on with having a good time with people (which includes arranging for social continuation - ie, meeting up again).

>it's more like a utility and should be regulated like one.

The idea that an online echo chamber is essential to life, is very depressing. Community exists in the incidental and in the repetitive rhythms of life.

Edit: The response to this is very interesting. I am very glad I returned to my native country instead of trying to build a life in the US, as it seems that something invented as a way to keep up with college girls has become deeply ingrained as a social necessity in a very short space of time.

I can only agree, if we are talking about kids who are already going to do well. For those kids who only went to school because it was socially demanded and part of life, then I could not disagree more. I know a headmaster of multiple schools in a deprived area near where I live, who said his kids will never recover because they've forgotten how to go to school (or never learned, depending on the timing).

"There's nothing wrong with the tech, we just need more adoption" sounds suspiciously like cryptocurrency.

It used to be heresy to suggest that Big Tech and Big Pharma were conspiring to make the absolute most of Covid. Now, not so much. I genuinely feel bad for parents who have had to make choices like this, against their will, as life had become unbearably difficult.

One thing that made lockdowns hardest for me was my refusal to give any of my kids (now 1 and 3) any tech as a babysitting device. Once I had made that choice, the sheer inhumanity of what we were being asked to do became apparent.