Kids aren't designed by default to process complexity without a little help, while Youtube's algorithms are designed to allow professionals to exploit them at 80 second intervals with almost no interaction. It's the kind of thing Ray Bradbury would start a riot if he saw.
-
Learning to fish (on YouTube) is obviously a good use of time if it puts needed food on the table. That’s a sound metric. Adults are more motivated to minimise regret; kids less so, but both can be hacked
What's a sound metric? Roughly what percentage of people who have regular access to youtube will ever fish because they won't be able to eat otherwise? If I don't learn to fish, what are the odds I will go hungry as the result?
-
-
More importantly, is there room for childhood at all in a world where the worthiness of any person's activities is evaluated on their potential to meet a plausible future need, however unlikely?
-
I understand your concern, but I think we can make judgements that still allow huge scope for freedom: that making a TikTok with friends is better than an hour of following recommended links on YouTube by yourself, for example
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Of course I chose this extreme example to show that sound metrics exist. A person who has their material needs met with have others further up the hierarchy. These will include social needs, not just worthy career goals
-
I'm guessing it doesn't occur to you what an utterly joyless way this is to describe a human life
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.