How could people not know, after living through Trump’s first term, that he’ll say anything—whatever works for him in the moment?
Sorry, but You Had to Be an Idiot to Believe Trump Could Lower Prices
The president’s disastrous affordability rally merely reraises the question: How could anyone have fallen for his campaign promises in the first place?The New Republic
🛑🇺🇸Say What You Will, However Zelensky Appears Less Kleptocratic Than The Trump Administration (WashingtonWeekPBS VIDEO) #Ukraine #Poland #Warsaw #Netherlands #Norway #Sweden #Estonia #Latvia #Lithuania #Paris #Rome #London #Berlin #Canada #Finland #Brussels #Denmark #Germany #France #Italy #OSCE #PACE #CoE #SouthKorea #Press #News #Taiwan #Media #Japan #US #UK #EU #NATO #UnitedStates #UnitedKingdom #EuropeanUnion #Czechia #Romania #russiaUkraineWar
#11yrInvasionOfUkraine
Palestine condemns US Ambassador’s support for Israeli settlement - Prensa Latina
Ramala, Dec 14 (Prensa Latina) Palestinian National Council President Rawhi Fattouh condemned US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee's support for the legalization of 19 Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank.Alina Ramos Martin (Prensa Latina)
《海洋堂的大秘寶》總公司藏有一門高射砲？這代表了模型師們不變的堅持
09:50
日本的老牌玩具公司「海洋堂」，長年以生產各類模型、公仔聞名，在業界擁有相當高的知名度。而最近有綜藝節目就潛入他們的總公司，赫然發現公司倉庫藏有許多令人震驚的玩意。譬如二戰時期的高射砲、履帶摩托車或是水...
news.gamme.com.tw/1772865
👍 Xbox app for Android delivers full store and wishlist sync in beta update 👍
alternativeto.net/news/2025/12…
#xbox #xboxnews #microsoft #microsoftnews #tech #technews #android #androidbeta #gaming #games #xboxconsole #console #wishlist #app #mobile #apps #xboxapp #xboxgaming #xboxandroid
Borsa: Hong Kong apre a -1,03%, Vanke affonda a -5,43% - Ultima ora - Ansa.it
https://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/topnews/2025/12/15/borsa-hong-kong-apre-a-103-vanke-affonda-a-543_7b37f56c-4503-4c77-a8df-31b9e9fc8097.html?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub
Pubblicato su ANSA Ultima ora @ansa-ultima-ora-AgenziaAnsa
Borsa: Hong Kong apre a -1,03%, Vanke affonda a -5,43% - Ultima ora - Ansa.it
La Borsa di Hong Kong apre la seduta in territorio negativo: l'indice Hang Seng cede nelle prime battute l'1,03%, a 25.709,46 punti. (ANSA)Agenzia ANSA
This blog post makes up the backbone of what we're trying to do at MTEC. We're trying to balance community and advocacy be leveraging larger organizations and focusing on local needs.
miamitech.club/outpost-for-adv…
#Miami #Florida #DigitalRights #ConsumerRights #Privacy #Tech
Outpost for Advocacy: MTEC's Strategy and Goals
How will MTEC make an impact? As part of preparing the launch of this club/project, I've come up with a strategy and a set of short-term goals that will guid...MTEC | Miami Tech Enthusiast Club
Ricardo Antonio Piana likes this.
China Shadow Bank’s Missed Payments Show Growing Property Stress
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-15/china-shadow-bank-s-missed-payments-show-growing-property-stress?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub
Posted into Profiles @profiles-bloomberg
🪓 Algorithms do widen the divide: Social media feeds shape political polarization
english.elpais.com/technology/…
#media #socialmedia #culture #technology #politics #polarization #algorithms #heuristics
Algorithms do widen the divide: Social media feeds shape political polarization
A study shows that the order in which platforms like X display content to their users affects their animosity towards other ideological groupsManuel G. Pascual (Ediciones EL PAÍS S.L.)
Ricardo Antonio Piana likes this.
JSDoc is TypeScript
Link: culi.bearblog.dev/jsdoc-is-typ…
Discussion: news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4…
JSDoc *is* TypeScript
In May of 2023 an from the Svelte repo made it to the front page of the Hacker News forums. The (superficially) controversial PR seemingly vindicated TypeSc...culi.bear.blog
👎 Crunchyroll will end its free ad supported plan on December 31, moving fully to paid tiers 👎
alternativeto.net/news/2025/12…
#crunchyroll #crunchyrollnews #crunchyrollfreetier #tech #technews #anime #animenews #tvshow #paidtiers #paidonly #dec31 #cartoons #cartoonsnews #streaming #animestreaming
Political vs. Governance
This 8-part series delineates where our elected politicians spend their time.
Hint: they spend a lot of time enhancing their status, influence, and power.
tiereddemocraticgovernance.org…
#tiereddemocraticgovernance
#politics #governance
The Council of Europe should adopt a convention on transnational repression, rights groups say
cross-posted from: mander.xyz/post/43319573
Web archive link
Over 1,000 documented TNR [Transnational Repression] cases have occurred since 2014, affecting individuals across 100 countries and involving at least 44 perpetrator states. Europe has emerged as a critical venue for TNR, with a growing number of targeted journalists, human rights defenders, political opponents, and whistleblowers seeking safety and protection on European soil.Despite the scope of the problem, there is currently no binding European or international legal instrument specifically addressing TNR. Existing human rights instruments, including the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), while applicable in principle, do not offer comprehensive safeguards tailored to the realities of TNR.
https://ifex.org/the-council-of-europe-should-adopt-a-convention-on-transnational-repression/
Russian servicemen returning from front kill or injure more than thousand people – intelligence
In Russia, the return of military personnel from the front has turned into a serious internal threat: “veterans” of the war against Ukraine have already killed or injured more than a thousand people. — Ukrinform.Ukrinform
Anthropic Outage for Opus 4.5 and Sonnet 4/4.5 across all services
Link: status.claude.com/incidents/9g…
Discussion: news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4…
Elevated errors across many models
Claude's Status Page - Elevated errors across many models.status.claude.com
Together For Palestine - Lullaby (Official Music Video) - YouTube
youtube.com/watch?v=G957oaAZwh…
#NowPlaying #Music #Palestine
@palestine@lemmy.ml @palestine@fedibird.com
- YouTube
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.www.youtube.com
reshared this
Palestine reshared this.
False claims Afrikaners are persecuted threaten South Africa’s sovereignty, says president
White supremacist ideology and false claims that South Africa’s Afrikaner minority is being racially persecuted pose a threat to the country’s sovereignty and national security, the country’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, has warned.Since taking office for his second US presidential term in January, Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed without evidence that South Africa’s government is seizing land and encouraging violence against white farmers.
False claims Afrikaners are persecuted threaten South Africa’s sovereignty, says president
Cyril Ramaphosa says theories, promoted by Donald Trump, ‘conveniently align with wider notions of white supremacy’Rachel Savage (The Guardian)
Seizing land from white farmers in a continent where said white people are not indigenous is such a white thing to say.
Power to the South African government! 👊
~Feel free to use that fist however you see fit.~
like this
Maeve likes this.
*undeveloped land.
They're not having their homes taken as far as I'm aware just land good for farming and industry that is just being sat on by wealthy families.
RE: bsky.app/profile/did:plc:bflwd…
Police raid Unification Church leader’s residence, multiple sites - The Korea Herald
Police on Monday raided the residence of Unification Church leader Han Hak-ja and nine other locations over allegations the church bribed politicians, officialsYonhap (The Korea Herald)
Catering workers on #strike because they can’t afford to feed their own families. Our members want to work and take pride in what they do, but refuse to be exploited.
teamsters.ca/blog/2025/12/14/g…
#strikes #union #unions #exploitation #Ottawa #GateGourmet #Teamsters #LivingWage #capitalism #ClassWar
Gate Gourmet Airline Catering Workers on Strike at Ottawa Airport | Teamsters Canada
In-flight meals, holiday travel from Ottawa Airport to be disrupted Ottawa, Sunday, December 14 – Airline catering workers at Gate Gourmet in Ottawa began strike action at 12:01 am today after last minute negotiations with the company failed.communications (Teamsters Canada)
Proletarian Rage reshared this.
How an Oklahoma student's gender essay became a national culture war fight
How an Oklahoma student's gender essay became a national culture war fight
Ryan Walters had a suggestion for the University of Oklahoma student who emailed him for help over a bad grade.“Fight back.Tyler Kingkade (NBC News)
copymyjalopy likes this.
tri-seed planets race
spectra.video/w/7Pr1eHabPBDYTx…
stream.place/nolamiamada.crypt…
twitch.tv/nolamiamada
Sensitive content
Gelbooru LinkSource
seizou hidzuke, arona (blue archive), blue archive, light blue hair, absurdres, highres, 1girl, bare shoulders, blue dress, blue eyes, blue hair, blush, bow hairband, braid, breasts, choker, colored inner hair, dress, envelope, gem, hair over one eye, hai
Browse millions of anime, manga, videos, hentai, and video game themed images on Gelbooru. Discover art with detailed tags. Contains explicit hentai content.Gelbooru
Rust, Rail, and Ribbed Steel.
Launceston, Tasmania, Australia.
© 𝓐𝓵𝓵 𝓡𝓲𝓰𝓱𝓽𝓼 𝓡𝓮𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓿𝓮𝓭 𝓫𝔂 𝓚𝓮𝓿 𝓟𝓮𝓲𝓻𝓬𝓮.
#photo #photography #australia #tasmania #BlackAndWhitePhotography #Monochrome #StreetPhotography #Launceston #Industrial #UrbanExploration #RustyMetal #WaterTank #CorrugatedIron
like this
Atelopus-zeteki, dflemstr e mrmaplebar like this.
Sydney Shooting Suspects Father and Son, Brown Shooting Latest
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/audio/2025-12-15/sydney-shooting-suspects-father-and-son-brown-shooting-latest?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub
Posted into Podcasts @podcasts-bloomberg
#11yrInvasionOfUkraine
Russian occupiers damage centralized water supply system in Kherson
Russian occupiers have once again shelled critical infrastructure in Kherson, damaging the centralized water supply system. — Ukrinform.Ukrinform
Partisans reconnoiter key Black Sea fleet logistics hub in Sevastopol
Agents of the ATESH partisan movement have carried out detailed reconnaissance of the 758th Logistics Support Center (military unit No. 63876) of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol. — Ukrinform.Ukrinform
Hows your "input diet"?
I've probably eaten a little too much politics and tech hype in recent months. Back to tight curation.
> A smaller set of trusted sources. Fewer platforms. Slower rhythms. Long-form over live feeds. Reading with intention instead of grazing out of habit. Choosing inputs that compound rather than evaporate.
> ...clarity increases. Focus returns. Taste sharpens. You start noticing which ideas are actually yours.
Billionaire Coupang Founder Rejects Summons to Data Leak Hearing
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-15/billionaire-coupang-founder-rejects-summons-to-data-leak-hearing?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub
Posted into Tech @tech-bloomberg
Millions of children and teens lose access to accounts as Australia’s world-first social media ban begins
Australia has enacted a world-first ban on social media for users aged under 16, causing millions of children and teenagers to lose access to their accounts.
Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Kick, Twitch and TikTok are expected to have taken steps from Wednesday to remove accounts held by users under 16 years of age in Australia, and prevent those teens from registering new accounts.
Platforms that do not comply risk fines of up to $49.5m.
There have been some teething problems with the ban’s implementation. Guardian Australia has received several reports of those under 16 passing the facial age assurance tests, but the government has flagged it is not expecting the ban will be perfect from day one.
All listed platforms apart from X had confirmed by Tuesday they would comply with the ban. The eSafety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, said it had recently had a conversation with X about how it would comply, but the company had not communicated its policy to users.
Bluesky, an X alternative, announced on Tuesday it would also ban under-16s, despite eSafety assessing the platform as “low risk” due to its small user base of 50,000 in Australia.
Parents of children affected by the ban shared a spectrum of views on the policy. One parent told the Guardian their 15-year-old daughter was “very distressed” because “all her 14 to 15-year-old friends have been age verified as 18 by Snapchat”. Since she had been identified as under 16, they feared “her friends will keep using Snapchat to talk and organise social events and she will be left out”.
Others said the ban “can’t come quickly enough”. One parent said their daughter was “completely addicted” to social media and the ban “provides us with a support framework to keep her off these platforms”.
“The fact that teenagers occasionally find a way to have a drink doesn’t diminish the value of having a clear, national standard.”
Polling has consistently shown that two-thirds of voters support raising the minimum age for social media to 16. The opposition, including leader Sussan Ley, have recently voiced alarm about the ban, despite waving the legislation through parliament and the former Liberal leader Peter Dutton championing it.
The ban has garnered worldwide attention, with several nations indicating they will adopt a ban of their own, including Malaysia, Denmark and Norway. The European Union passed a resolution to adopt similar restrictions, while a spokesperson for the British government told Reuters it was “closely monitoring Australia’s approach to age restrictions”.
Millions of children and teens lose access to accounts as Australia’s world-first social media ban begins
Accounts held by users under 16 must be removed on apps that include TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Kick, Twitch and Threads under banJosh Taylor (The Guardian)
like this
dandi8, dflemstr e felixthecat like this.
Mumble and Pigdin won't be banned right? Also, swapping mobile numbers and getting on conference calls... Writing letters and all that. There's still other ways to communicate.
I'm almost thinking of making a quick phone app to give them options and ideas on how to communicate outside of the big tech bubble.
I wonder if making your own personal website on Neocities/Geocities will come back in vogue again.
If enough of it is still around. A lot of the old spaces that used to exist aren't around any more.
Plus things like YouTube and Discord aren't banned, do chances are, they would end up there instead.
Github may be, strangely enough.
One parent said their daughter was “completely addicted” to social media
Have you tried parenting her?
like this
RandomStickman likes this.
like this
RandomStickman likes this.
"Give me your phone, give me your laptop" works pretty well.
My phone has a giant "setup parental controls" button. You can block specific websites using tools like PiHole that are easy to set up.
True, but there's also a little more nuance.
For a social media ban to be effective without ostracizing individuals, it has to include the entire friend group.
As an analogy, if the kid's friends all text each other, but your kid doesn't have a phone, they miss out socially. They miss out on organized and impromptu hangouts. And they miss out on inside jokes that develop in the group chat. Over time they feel like more and more of an outsider even if the ready of the group actively tries to include them.
That and it's a 'social media ban' which is a pretty broad term. Depending how you define social media it could ecompase a lot of other platforms not included in the initial list i.e. Steam, Discord, etc.
This could lead to further restrictions on freedom of speech and anonymity dependent on whatever agenda the government is pushing or to try to control dissent by forcing the poplace to provide some form of ID to access any platform/access the internet.
That may be a leap too far from where we currently are, but it's an important factor to consider as it could have wider reaching consequences if left unchecked.
That being said, I think the large social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter are cesspools that prey on children/teens and are designed to be addictive even for adults.
It's due to that I'm stuck on the fence a little. If anything we as a society should be looking to pressure social media companies to operate ethically.
What has happened instead is that the Australian government has basically pushed the onus on social media companies to block access to these platforms and threatened them with a fine. There's no real plan for implementation, no push for education on social media and its issues.
Some good silver linings here, but what everyone needs to remember here is that nobody would be supporting this at all if facebook wasn’t intentionally predatory and bad for (all) people’s brains.
If regulators in Australia had a spine they would call for an end to those practices, and now that’s infinitely harder to do
like this
Pebble_Clef e YoSoySnekBoi like this.
I think that's easier said than done. There are a lot of negatives associated with social media and some are easier to put restrictions on (say violent content) but I don't think we really have a good grasp of all the ways use is associated with depression for example. And wouldn't some of this still fall back to age restricted areas, kind of like with movies?
But yeah, it would be nice to see more push back on the tech companies instead of the consumers
Its a very simple fix with a few law changes.
- The act of promoting or curating user submitted data makes the company strictly liable for any damages done by the content.
- The deliberate spreading of harmful false information makes the hosting company liable for damages.
This would bankrupt Facebook, Twitter, etc within 6 months.
The act of promoting or curating user submitted data makes the company strictly liable for any damages done by the content.
I assume you don't mean simply providing the platform for the content to be hosted, in that case I agree this would definetly help.
The deliberate spreading of harmful false information makes the hosting company liable for damages.
This one is damn near impossible to enforce for the sole reason of the word "deliberate", the issue is that I would not support such a law without that part.
I left out the hosting part for just that reason. The company has to activately do something to gain the liability. Right now the big social media companies are deliberately prioritizing harmful information to maximize engagement and generate money.
As for enforcement hosters have had to develop protocols for removal of illegal content since the very beginning. Its still out there and can be found, but laws and mostly due diligence from hosters, makes it more difficult to find. Its the reason Lemmy is not full of illegal pics etc. The hosters are actively removing it and banning accounts that publish it.
Those protocols could be modified to include obvious misinformation bots etc. Think about the number of studies that have shown that just a few accounts are the source of the majority of harmful misinformation on social media.
Of course any reporting system needs to be protected from abuse. The DMCA takedown abusers are a great example of why this is needed.
This one is damn near impossible to enforce for the sole reason of the word "deliberate", the issue is that I would not support such a law without that part.
It would also be easily abused, especially since someone would have to take a look and check, which would already put a bottleneck in the system, and the social media site would have to take it down to check, just in case, which gives someone a way to effectively remove posts.
That kind of aligns with some actions I would love to see but I don't really see how it helps in the example I used to highlight some of the harder things to fix, depression. How does that improve the correlation between social media use and depression in teenagers? I can see it will improve from special cases like removing posts pro eating disorder content but I'm pretty confident the depression correlation goes well beyond easy to moderate content.
Also, if we presumed that some amount of horrific violence is okay for adults to choose to see and a population of people thinks its reasonable to restrict this content for people below a certain age (or swap violence for sex / nudity) then do we just decide we know better than that population, that freedom is more important, or does it fall back to age restrictions again (but gated on parts of the site)? I'm avoiding saying "government" here and going with "population of people" to try to decouple a little from some of the negatives people associate with government, especially since COVID
But yeah, holding tech companies accountable like that would be lovely to see. I suspect the cost is so large they couldn't pay so it would never happen, but I think that's because society has been ignoring their negative externalities for so long they're intrenched
Some good silver linings here
Where?
The kids will move to less monitored platforms and even on things like YouTube, parental controls are now gone.
You need to have an account for parental controls to be applied to, kids aren't allowed an account, vis-a-vis, no more parental controls or monitoring for problem content.
As someone that grew up with an "unmonitored" internet. I can say that it was significantly more healthy than the profit driven "keep watching" algorithm that is all of social media today.
Yeah. I saw "two girls one cup" and "lemon party". But, did I slowly have my perspective of reality changed by the 30 second videos I swiped on for hours at a time for days on end?
No, most of my time was spent learning about computers, "stealing" music, and chatting with my real life friends.
I don't think a kid today can experience that internet anymore. It's gone. But acting like "unmonitored" internet access is worse is pearl clutching and ignoring the fundamental problems the profit driven internet has created at the expense of societies mental health.
Kids will absolutely find another place to connect online in Australia. But, honestly, I think whatever that is will be healthier than the absolute brain rot that is profit driven social media.
Wasn't aware that social media keeps kids alive?...
I've seen enough stories on kids being cyber bullied into suicide that I really doubt there's enough happy inclusion on these platforms to balance that.
Let's legally require social media companies to gather even more sensitive information about their users, making them more vulnerable to identity theft in the process and isolating the most vulnerable in our society from their support networks. There is literally nothing negative about this.
You are a fucking imbecile.
Strangely enough, support networks can exist outside of social media. It's very possible to directly message friends or neighbors without being subjected to the dregs of public social media. It remains possible to get world/local news without an attached public forum.
If you're going to make a space that has content for adults and allows for free adult discussions (with all the nuance and complications that entails), then restrict it to adults only.
This is only a problem in conjuction with legislation requiring social media use (ie: as an official broadcast system, payment platform, electoral tool, etc...). If we fight that and force it to remain an opt-in disinformation platform then who cares?
As it currently stands nothing is forcing you on these platforms other than a conditioned familiarity. Even worse, there are no tech or legal protections preventing them uniquely identifying users today. Them getting an official state ID doesn't change much. More barriers to entry for a shitty surveillance and propoganda platform? Literally no downsides there.
It's a bandaid. And just like previous attempts like this all this will do is make Australian kids better at circumventing the censorship or using an alternative website. Which, honestly, is probably a positive in and of itself. I'd much rather my kid be visiting some random forum type website (like I grew up with) then the absolute brain rot that is social media algorithms.
Seeing "lemon party" posted before the mods removed it definitely fucked me up less than the slop being fed into the brains of teenagers on social media today.
That was my first reaction after processing the news--lets hold them accountable for hate, exploitation, etc.
If they can't play nice they don't get to do business at all.
The alternative, of not being evil, is not compatible with their business model.
But it is the business model that should be banned, not socializing online by teenagers.
Tech giants are well known for lobbying against any legislation that gives them less freedoms to exploit markets and regulations of any kind that impact them - but this legislation that was targeted specifically at regulating them and removes a significant number of users - "this is suspicious, I think they might be the ones pushing it!"
There's so many people in under this post trying to turn it into anything but what it is - legislation attempting to protect kids from the harms of social media. Which, again - are well documented.
Er no.
My progeny is a decade ahead of where I was at his age. Smarter and more self assured and stable.
He’s not dumber. But I’ve realised I am.
Ah I see. Yep. And it’s easier to see it as you get older.
Didn’t want to miss out on the chance to diss myself though. I was as dumb as a rock back then. And in many ways, still am.
This is going to be a shit show.
I'm not opposed to the idea that kids shouldn't have access to social media, but they obviously do. Their social lives are online, and their insecure little brains are going to scream that they've been kicked out of the tribe when you cut the link
The ban won't work, but will also cause a lot of damage
Like teenagers, who run off social validation, suddenly feeling like they're excluded from their society
Kids are going to kill themselves.
And far more kids are going to develop complexes that they'll never recover from
Social isolation hits the brain like physical pain. We're hardwired to feel social isolation as trauma, logic can't save you from feeling like you've been cut off from your peers
Withdrawal is an unpleasant, but necessary, part of detox.
On the other hand, I 100% agree it's going to be a shit show. Technological development has outpaced the law as long as I've been alive, and the disparity is only growing... Authorities are not equipped to provide solutions to the problems that technology has created, and continues to create.
Withdrawal isn't what I'm worried about... You can't cut teens off from their peers and get a good result
Those who can will evade, those who can't will feel a crippling level of isolation. That doesn't do good things to a teenage mind
One parent said their daughter was “completely addicted” to social media
Literally the fault of the parent.
There is precedence though. We age gate: nicotine, alcohol, gambling etc..
we shouldnt expect parents to be monitoring children 24/7. actually, as children get older they should be given freedoms, parents have the right to expect our society has some guardrails.
The guardrails already exist. Put parental controls on your kid's devices. Done, solved. Block social media sites, monitor what they're doing online. Don't go making it mandatory for everyone to give social media companies more information than they already have.
A better comparison would be "let's put a government mandated ID scanner on everyone's liquor cabinet so that their kids can't access it! Oh you don't have kids? Too bad, still need that ID scanner!"
Maybe the focus should be on a free (government funded, ideally FOSS) parental controls software suite that makes blocking social media on all major platforms (iOS, Android, Windows, Mac, and Linux) simple and easy. Promote it to parents, and get them to parent, instead of deanonymizing the internet for everyone.
The guardrails already exist. Put parental controls on your kid’s devices. Done, solved.
But nobody does that, and the problem is getting worse.
What's your answer if you can't get a population to make better choices and people are being harmed by something?
I'm not saying there's a right answer here, I am genuinely looking for alternatives on a societal level to address a proven health problem.
The bans are for under 16s, not just 7 year olds. Parents don't control all internet activity for 15 years, at that age they are going to have some autonomy outside of the house.
I'm not sure there is a direct irl analog when it comes to controlling digital spaces, since they are personal by nature. and I think this is where the debate comes in.
Should parents be following their teenage child into every store to make sure they aren't buying alcohol?
I get the concern with providing social media companies a government ID, I certainly would never give them one! I would just not use them. But they provide net negative value in my opinion so no loss.
I like the idea of FOSS parental controls.
Parents who were also raised by social media? This isn't a new problem but it is a problem that's getting worse, I don't know if a ban is the answer but so far nobody has even suggested an effective alternative to reducing screen-time for both adults and kids.
This ban isn't supposed to solve a problem overnight, but it's supposed to influence some segment of the population to socialize, to form real communities and to hopefully grow up capable of helping their own kids not get addicted.
This is a real problem, it's widespread across the globe and many, many studies have shown the harm social media has on a huge percentage of teens.
Also, parents work. Parents sleep. You can't fucking hover over your teen night and day, you would hate that worse.
The solution is education not bans.
I agree.
But what do we do about the fact that even though our knowledge, research and understanding of the problem has increased, the problem has gotten worse? Is there more that can be done on that front that you think would be effective? Genuinely asking to help me shape my opinion.
It's blooming into a larger-scale societal problem than just hoping enough people pull through, a lack of stable mental health and attention spans across large swaths of your population start to erode your society.
And for what? So boomer politicians and their constituents aren't challenged by their well-informed children about the genocides they're facilitating at home and abroad? So the pigs in this police state have an even easier time surveiling citizens with all the identifying info websites are gathering??
Social media use by kids and teens has been demonstrated factually to cause harm to people's mental health and social lives. The sources are plenty and widespread.
I still don't know if a ban is the answer, but at least it's an attempt to address a problem. I'm curious what your answer would be to this growing problem?
I figure holding tech giants directly accountable for the specific harms they've caused would be better than punishing an entire population but unfortunately our politicians are mostly either invertebrates who are too cowardly to pick fights with foreign corporate entities (so they're useless drains of political will) or they're actively supportive of them on the grounds of being ideologically pro-business (so, evil).
They feed us their poisons (surveillance capitalism and an unhealthy information ecosystem driven by algorithmic optimisation for advertising revenue) so they can sell us their "medicines" (age gating and mandatory identification online—more data harvesting as a selling point to advertisers) while they suppress our cure (an internet by independent creators as opposed to capitalist brands)
figure holding tech giants directly accountable for the specific harms they’ve caused
I don't disagree that the entire institution is rotten and causing harm, but in terms of just socializing online, just the act of forming communities and forums and discussion groups and sharing content, the essence of what's becoming harmful, what is the right answer here? The stuff that causes a lot of the harm is just what people tend to do online, because humans broadly are not meant to substitute real social connections for whatever is happening when we scroll and type and read other people's thoughts and fantasies and depressed manifestos of strangers every day.
Even now, you're reading my text inside your head in your own voice. The act alone of having this discussion is creating an entirely new kind of information pattern in your brain that we haven't had in the last half-million years or so since our brains evolved. Do you know what this new kind of information processing is doing to your view of the world? Do any of us?
I know if you type "research teens social media health" into google you will have days of reading material about the research done and how harmful these practices are. But I'm not sensing that anyone even cares honestly. Is it better that we let whatever happens happen? I'm not being facetious, I want to know if people genuinely think that this isn't a problem worth fighting.
The stuff that causes a lot of the harm is just what people tend to do online…
The online harms I'm concerned with are bullying, harassment and misinformation. Platforms should be required by society to moderate against these, or face penalties proportionate to revenue. Instead just banning under 16s, even if it could be done in a way that is both effective and respectful of everyone's privacy (I'm not convinced that it can) would still be a lazy abrogation of this responsibility, still leaving kids vulnerable to the same behaviours in offline spaces and everyone else vulnerable to the harms purportedly being caused among the youth online currently.
But the government isn't interested in this because these behaviours serve to entrench existing social hierarchies, and the government—being in charge of the nation-state—likes existing social hierarchies.
I figure holding tech giants directly accountable for the specific harms they’ve caused
What if; the social media giants are in another country. Your country doesn't have jurisdiction there and can do fuck all in reality.
Maybe fine them???? Sure, which they will fight in court until the end of time; all the while the harm continues.
I don't know if a ban will work, or what extra harms it will cause. But there are no good options to tackle this on the large scales of whole countries.
Algorithmic social media is mind cancer; if you have a better suggestion for tackling this issue. Let us know.
Lemmy is social media; but there is no algorithmic feed, my views are not being manipulated by some engagement maximizing machine.
What if; the social media giants are in another country. Your country doesn't have jurisdiction there and can do fuck all in reality.Maybe fine them???? Sure, which they will fight in court until the end of time; all the while the harm continues.
The ban proves it's possible to legislate, so maybe they should just legislate something better lol? Holding platforms accountable to a bare minimum standard of moderation against misinformation, bullying and harassment might be a starting point. And hey, if socmed's really that bad for you, then us adults could benefit from this alternative, too! In any case, this ban is literally worse than just leaving the problem be.
In any case, this ban is literally worse than just leaving the problem be.
I don't really agree; the ban will do two things.
1/ it will show the social media companies that, Australia at least; has tools that they can use to reduce their power.
2/ show kids that this is really serious; it is not just your parents saying shit you can ignore.
Will some kids work out how to get around it; yep, 100%. Will it be a big portion; maybe, tech literacy is not as high as it could/should be.
Holding platforms accountable to a bare minimum standard of moderation against misinformation, bullying and harassment might be a starting point.
This would be great; but it is also too little too late. They have tried, and failed at exactly this for years.
And hey, if socmed’s really that bad for you, then us adults could benefit from this alternative, too!
It is that bad for you! Algorithmic social media is doing you harm.
Wall of text incoming.
1/ it will show the social media companies that, Australia at least; has tools that they can use to reduce their power.
Holding platforms accountable to a bare minimum standard of moderation against misinformation, bullying and harassment might be a starting point.This would be great; but it is also too little too late. They have tried, and failed at exactly this for years.
I don't see how both these claims can simultaneously be true. Either Australia has tools to hold these companies to account, in which case, how would they have previously failed if they'd already tried? Or it doesn't, and this is just one more completely futile policy that won't give companies any more than the usual slap on the wrist if it ever goes to court.
I argue that they didn't try, because they never actually cared about children's wellbeing, because if they did they'd have done better than this, ergo this policy isn't really about that and is actually about making citizens more easily identifiable online.
Additionally, it does nothing to reduce the power of seppo tech giants. On the contrary, they've got money, they'll be fine. Independent social media sites however, don't all have the resources to implement verification systems, so some will feel the financial burden of compliance a lot harder, and others will simply cease serving Australian users, further strengthening Silicon Valley's hold over the internet.
As I have said over and over again in this thread, what the ban will do is cut children suffering domestic abuse (a problem that is absolutely rife in this country) off from their support networks. It'll cut minority kids that're subjected to bullying by their peers off from their communities. It'll drive more kids to shadier corners of the internet where they're at greater risk of predation. I'm not being hyperbolic when I say this is going to get children killed.
Furthermore—and again, as I've been repeating all over this thread—everyone—yes, that includes adults—will be required to submit personally identifiable information to private organisations just to communicate with other people online, making anyone in this country who uses social media a potential victim of identity theft the moment a data breach happens. And happen it will. It's happened before, and it'll happen again.
What's more, knowing that the platforms they're using have their identities will make a great many people more hesitant to speak critically about existing power structures, especially the government. This is bad.
I stand by my previously stated opinion that all this is worse than the status quo, but even if it weren't you should be asking why this is the solution that the government came up with.
I don’t see how both these claims can simultaneously be true.
Sorry, my poor communications...I was referring to the social media companies, when I said they had been trying and failing for years. Not trying that hard mind you; moderation is a very expensive problem to solve, and they don't want to spend money they don't explicitly have to.
(it's) actually about making citizens more easily identifiable online.
Maybe. That is speculation, probably a nice little side effect. But not the primary goal.
Independent social media sites however, don’t all have the resources to implement verification systems, so some will feel the financial burden of compliance a lot harder, and others
This is a great point; and there is an easy way to solve this problem. Not that the govt will care that a simple solution exists. If you don't have an algorithmic feed a lot of the spread of misinformation is curtailed. If you are not allowed to host images/video etc directly than the moderation of them can be off loaded to 3rd parties.
What’s more, knowing that the platforms they’re using have their identities will make a great many people more hesitant to speak critically about existing power structures.
Another great point. I don't have a good answer to this one, but there are anonymous leak avenues etc for serious stuff.
I don't disagree with any of that.
I am mostly asking people here what they think the alternative should be. Like you say, parents who manage and monitor this are going have better outcomes... but that's not the norm, and the problem is getting worse despite all of us having more knowledge and proof how vital it is for their kids to have their internet use managed. So I am not convinced any kind of education campaign is going to do much. Most parents are just as addicted to their phones and rather scroll than parent. This is a societal problem with many intersecting problems.
The ban also affects everyone who isn't willing to undergo the age check.
Kids will find a way around is. They'll move to fediverse, and the cooler kids will still hang around the mainstream platforms thanks to their older friend, sibling or cool uncle.
It’s not designed at all.
Some pearl-clutches said “won’t somebody think of the children”, and then made the social media companies figure out how to implement the ban.
The social media companies all looked at the free, government mandated access to user biometrics and complied.
Do I think that social media should be restricted for children and teens? Sure.
Do I think this if going to go about as well as the 2007 porn filter that the government tried to implement? Absolutely.
Do I think that social media should be restricted for children and teens? Sure.
Okay, I agree and I am not exactly cheering for government telling anyone what they can and can't look at... but what's the alternative here? I am cautiously siding with the idea behind the regulation if not the execution, but so far nobody has suggested what we do about a problem that is real, proven and studied and is leading to a worse world.
I'm being serious here and in good faith. Should we do anything?
Am I in the wrong here for thinking we need to do something about this? Or is everyone just okay with whatever the end-result will be from subsequent generations of people growing up anxious, depressed, lacking social skills, without relationship partners? We already have "loneliness" being considered a global health risk, and it's tied directly to digital communication habits. I would ask you or anyone here to just type "research on health social media teens" in google. Just try it and see how much work has gone into studying this problem.
"people will find ways around it" and then saying not to bother etc
i mean, people under 18 sneak into clubs and get beer... or maybe fake an ID and hit a pub... or get an older friend to do something for them....
it doesnt stop us as a society holding a view that under age drinking isnt great, and we make some effort to enforce that even if its not perfect.
Some pearl-clutches said “won’t somebody think of the children”, and then made the social media companies figure out how to implement the ban.
Bingo.
It's never about "the children." It's a way to normalize handing over biometrics and anonymity to an assumed authority to use the internet.
It's always about control, control, control.
It's about tying real identities to online activity, then it's about wholesale harvesting your secrets you didn't even know you were keeping.
Then it's yet another instrument to make sure you shut up and don't step out of line or else.
First they take us away from our kids by necessitating that entire households need full time careers to survive.
Then as a substitute for education and actual parenting we're so eager to offer up our childrens' futures in the name of "protecting" them from the inevitable consequences of parentless households.
Some pearl-clutches said “won’t somebody think of the children”, and then made the social media companies figure out how to implement the ban.
It's more than pearl-clutching though.
Kids dependency on social is a genuine social problem. Any parent that cares about their kids is deeply concerned about this.
I don't really buy the "govt access to biometrics" angle. These companies have all the biometrics they could ever want.
The ban is going to be easy to circumvent technologically, but not so much socially. At this very moment, being the evening of 10 December, families around Australia are having conversations about social media and the problems it can cause.
We already took away all their in-person spaces.
Arcades and malls have been dead for a long time. Capitalism took them away.
Everyone is missing incentive to go outside and hang out with real people, but that's only because we have an alternative that fills you up and requires less effort. Our "socializing" is junk food, it only harms you.
Maybe more young people will start doing what kids have been doing since the dawn of time, and making their own communities and their own places to hang out and play and do active things together, face-to-face.
Digital technologies are really the only way kids have to socialize nowadays.
I don't disagree, but digital technologies are causing a lot of harm. I thought I would prepare for the discussion with a couple links to some suggestive studies, but there have been so many rigorous studies and scientific papers on the harm of social media on young minds that I don't even know where to start. Denying it is like denying climate change at this point.
And maybe my take is becoming radical, but I don't think we should be looking at it in terms of a youth/adult problem. There are likely far more adults addicted to the junk-food substitute that is arguing on twitter or making separate identities to fabricate ideas on message boards who have completely lost their handle on reality. Relationship rates are plummeting, people are so lonely it's being declared a health emergency.
Like, seriously... what should we do? I know the popular answer is to attack the social media companies and "regulate" them but the problem is more fundamental than advertising, it's that we're not evolved to socialize with words on screens, seeing all these thoughts and feelings and unchecked wild, emotion-provoking, short-attention-span messages isn't good for us. It may make you laugh spending an evening scrolling dumb memes, but if you do something like that every night, you're missing time that you could be spending improving your life, your health, your relationships and so on.
And replacing those evolved drives with something else, something alien to us.
As a millennial I honestly just miss how something like MySpace was basically a micro blog, and otherwise, we just chatted with friends-only programs like Yahoo! Messenger / MSN / ICQ/ whatever. There wasn't really some motive to "connect" you to a million "randos" and make you slavishly compete for their fickle approval.
Growing up in a weird kinda rural/suburb hybrid area, the Internet was my gateway to the world outside of school.
It definitely had its problems and drama, but mostly we chatted with people we actually knew (Yahoo chatrooms notwithstanding. Yikes lol) and didn't care about what was "trending" across the world. Algorithms didn't control and force perception of our reality then.
It was literally just about enabling communication.
Outside of that, there was also a much better culture of maintaining privacy and anonymity online, and that everything you see online is BS until proven otherwise.
Of course, this was before techbros decided we should use our real identity everywhere for all to see.
Nowadays it seems like every service is about using your friends as bait to connect you to some hivemind of toxic manipulation to farm you for ads. It encourages creating cults and scams and brainrot bullshit because it's all about harvesting people's already-strained attention for profit, instead of just being a communication platform.
TL;DR: I remember the Internet as a place to log in and hang out, then log off, when meeting with friends outside of school was a logistical nightmare reserved for things like birthday parties if you were lucky.
A lot of damage is already done, but I think if we obliterated the Facebooks and Instagrams and TikToks of "social media" and instead it focused on augmenting existing relationships rather than siloing people as a billion lonely socially-starved individuals in a crowd, we'd see it much differently...
Would you be in favor of nationalizing the internet in order for this to work? That is, no more commercial entities controlling access, no more media sites allowed to use algorithmic or artificially intelligent systems to influence the viewing habits of users, no more ads working their way into everything you see and do, no more sensationalized headlines and distracting video titles competing for attention because it will all be demonetized by law. (ideally, in a world of spherical, frictionless cows.)
In the US the government used to have standards and regulations for things like if a kid's show could be exclusively used to market toys, or that news stations had to follow a fair press agreement. The reason for this was all access to television had to go through airwaves, and the broadcasters for those airwaves were US government property. All broadcasters had to follow a host of rules and guidelines. This is why cable news was such a world-changing thing. Cable was privately owned.
This also has the side effect of the government controlling the news narrative, and I think we have seen enough of that.
I just don't really know if there's a good solution here, for a problem that has to have a solution or we all suffer.
Arcades and malls have been dead for a long time.
Comment clearly made by someone who does not actually live in the country this discussion is about. Shopping centres are doing just fine.
(To be clear, I am firmly against the ban)
This. I feel so bad for teenagers.
They're at a time in their lives where community and free association are vital to them, and yet since they're not necessarily a profitable demographic, they're kicked out and shunned by everywhere that's not home or school, because all that's left is "commercial spaces."
People then wonder why teenagers flip off society and get up to no good, and then maybe wonder why we all turned out to be lonely adults with like maybe one long term friend if we're lucky...
In Australia we have this thing called school, all the kids go there.
I have kids at ages affected by this ban. They don't care about it at all. They already communicate with their friends via iMessage and FaceTime (both unaffected by the ban), they walk to school - so they often walk with friends.
Theres a small skate park near the local shops they also walk to and hang out with friends sometimes, they also walk to the shops and practice basketball with friends at nearby ovals with practice courts regularly. They go to cinemas or big shopping centres (malls) with their friends sometimes - but have to be driven there anyway so parents have to coordinate.
TLDR: the ban doesn't affect a lot of kids at all, and they socialize more or less the same as I did when I was a kid.
The only kids heavily affected are those with Snapchat, Tiktok, Facebook and other crap that they shouldn't be on to begin with, and are getting a huge favour done to them by removing them for a few years.
Who's next to be blocked?
I mean, now that the infrastructure and policies are in place, it's only a matter of time.
People with a serious criminal record. Murderers and worse. Those who leave their victims alive but scarred mentally or physically.
Then those with less serious criminal records. Fraud. White collar crimes. That sort of thing.
Then other "undesirables" depending on who isn't liked by whoever's in charge.
And then the goalposts for what's desirable will start to move.
And the scope won't just be limited to social media. Websites will be categorised further. Some might remain open access to all people (except the ever increasing list of those to be protected and those who shouldn't have access) but others? No. Those sites themselves are undesirable.
Think more about which sites/platforms it applies to. There was some indecision about YouTube (its in EDIT: yt kids is out) & but signal/whatsapp/telegram are not affected - yet.
Not every new law is a slippery slope that leads to something, this line of reasoning is literally a fallacy.
When we blocked youth from drinking, we didn’t inch towards making it illegal for people in their 30s did we? Worst we got was like 21 in some places.
So Australia is using facial scanning to verify age, allowing everyone else to remain anonymous? That's how it should be done.
Here in Florida MAGA HQ, I'm hearing calls to verify the identity of EVERYONE on the Internet, because that's the ONLY way they can keep the kids off. I even heard one MAGA state legislator say that it's no difference then carding people for buying alcohol. That's how we keep booze out of the hands of kids, so it will work to keep the Internet out of their hands, too.
They want to kill Internet anonymity, just as a report comes out that the DoJ wants to pay bounties to people who report "anti-Trump behavior."
This will go to the Supreme Court before we're finished.
How else will they know if the person is over 16, or just pretending to be over 16?
Gotta verify everyone, scan all of their faces.
Minors don't have to prove they aren't adults, adults have to prove they aren't minors.
It's for the kids, you Commie.
On the contrary.
Loads of new platforms have sprung up with are not listed amongst those required to implement age verification.
Yes, any which become successful will be required to implement age verification but... they will already be successful.
It should be for the parents to let their children use social media or not
The issue is, parents who do not want to let their children use social media have really lost the battle because every other kid is on social media. So if even if a parent stands their ground on a strict "no social" policy, their kid is an outcast.
With this law, even though some kids will still be on social, parents are empowered to hold the line.
all her 14 to 15-year-old friends have been age verified as 18 by Snapchat
I love how this sentence is just casually sprinkled there. So platforms are getting $50m fines if they do not implement "age verification", but no problem if they fail to identify minors as such? Tells you everything about how they really care about protecting children.
That's not how the law is structured.
Sites are required to implement reasonable measures.
If kids are being evaluated as 18, with no additional checks, that's not reasonable and they're risking the penalties.
We're going to find out whether the regulator has much appetite to issue those penalties, but we will see I guess.
but no problem if they fail to identify minors as such?
it's a new technology. it will probably take years to figure out how to do age-verification properly.
Or, hear me out, let's not waste time developing useless and harmful surveillance technology.
None of this is required to safeguard children, and it does a bad job in its attempt - while doing a great job of scanning every user's face and documents.
Parents should be responsible, educated and empowered with tools to control their kids' activities online. Networks and mobile devices can relatively easily be configured to restrict and monitor activity, especially for young children where you might want to choose what to allow, rather than to block. There will be ways around them, but if that 1% is motivated enough and knows they shouldn't, I think that's fine.
Since she had been identified as under 16, they feared “her friends will keep using Snapchat to talk and organise social events and she will be left out”.
FFS, we all got along just fine and dandy with group-chats via text message. We weren't fucking cavemen.
The fact that this is her fear (and the fact that it's a legitimate fear) proves just how much controls like this are needed. It's literally digital crack that they think there's simply no other way to communicate anymore (both her and her friends)
Well then fucking take away her phone. Get her a dumb phone. Install parental controls. Go to a therapist if yo have to.
But nooooo the government has got to do everything for us incompetent fucks
I had this issue with a 15 year old. Phone gone, just an analog flippy, put in parental controls to prevent loading brain rot apps.
He's happier for it.
Get her a dumb phone. Install parental controls.
If this actually worked. I tried it once and it did not work at all. Platforms/apps don't seem to respect the device settings at all.
One parent told the Guardian their 15-year-old daughter was “very distressed” because “all her 14 to 15-year-old friends have been age verified as 18 by Snapchat”. Since she had been identified as under 16, they feared “her friends will keep using Snapchat to talk and organise social events and she will be left out”.
I think the ban should only apply to public-facing platforms, where everybody can see your content.
Platforms where you only talk to your friends should maybe be left out of it.
I would like to say that this is good for the quality of content on social media as well..
There's less bullshit content on social media if there's fewer kids, and also there's less incentive for other people to create bullshit content for teenagers to consume, if there's fewer teenagers on the platforms in the first place.
Roland Häder🇩🇪 likes this.
Sometimes I am to tired to share, to overwhelmed to convey my thoughts, sometimes I could careless about what and how to say, day by day is there really anything to say, for if a thought was a star space would be filled, darkness would be abolished, light would fill eternity, if only a thought held the value to be, what value are these absurd thoughts of mine, for eyes don't see, ears wont hear, no pondering convention of these random thoughts of mine, I have no clue why I share at all, internal conversations that would confound and deafen all, to speak my mind seems like a silly rhyme, yet at times I have nothing to do but share my thoughts with all;
You can encourage my continued useless #poetry, creativity and expression of self, #commentary, random thoughts, #philosophy and ideas, and by doing so your helping to feed, house and clothe a #disabled man living in #poverty, $5-10-15 It All Helps, via #cashapp at $woctxphotog or via #paypal at paypal.com/donate?campaign_id=…
ＮＡＴＯ事務総長の戦争準備発言は「無責任」、ロシアが批判 | ロイター - WACOCA NEWS
ロシア大統領府（クレムリン）は１４日、北大西洋条約機構（ＮＡＴＯ）のルッテ事務総長がロシアとの戦争を準備すべきと発言したことを無責任だと非難し、第二次世界大戦がもたらした惨禍を真に理解していないことを示していると述べた。WACOCA News Editor (WACOCA NEWS)
Darby Creek, PA
Took my family for a walk along a local creek ❄️
-5 °C (23 °F), feels like -15 °C (5 °F) according to the forecast, though it felt better 🤔 They enjoyed the scenery 😉
#GetOutside #FlyFishing #Fishing #Nature #Hiking #Walking #Creek #Snow #Photography
Hillary Clinton Says Young People Oppose Gaza Genocide Due to “Totally Made Up” Videos
ECOWAS sounds alarm as West Africa enters regional state of emergency
ECOWAS sounds alarm as West Africa enters regional state of emergency
ECOWAS has declared a state of emergency in West Africa, citing rising coups, expanding security threats and worsening political instability.Business Insider Africa
WhatsApp’s biggest market is becoming its toughest test
https://techcrunch.com/2025/12/14/whatsapps-biggest-market-is-becoming-its-toughest-test/?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub
Posted into Latest TechCrunch Stories @latest-techcrunch-stories-Techcrunch
WhatsApp's biggest market is becoming its toughest test | TechCrunch
Meta has three months to comply with Indian government directions that could affect how WhatsApp operates in the country.Jagmeet Singh (TechCrunch)
Moves to appropriate properties now effectively defunct and relaunch the bird
'startup calling itself “Operation Bluebird” announced this week that it has filed a formal petition...to cancel X Corporation’s trademarks of the words “Twitter” and “tweet” since X has allegedly abandoned them'
#twitter #socialMedia #technology
arstechnica.com/information-te…
Operation Bluebird wants to relaunch “Twitter,” says Musk abandoned the name and logo
“Abandonment” offers rare chance to reclaim one of tech’s most recognized brands.Ars Contributors (Ars Technica)
Ricardo Antonio Piana likes this.
The post Anschlag auf Chanukka-Feier: „Held von Bondi Beach“ entreißt Attentäter die Waffe appeared first on Apollo News. #news #press
Anschlag auf Chanukka-Feier: „Held von Bondi Beach“ entreißt Attentäter die Waffe - Apollo News
Außergewöhnliche Videoaufnahmen vom Terroranschlag am Bondi Beach in Sydney zeigen einen Mann, der sich unbewaffnet an einen der Täter heranschleicht und ihm erfolgreich das Gewehr entreißt.Marius Marx (Apollo News)
reshared this
Lesley Carhart reshared this.
myrmepropagandist
in reply to Ossie • • •myrmepropagandist
in reply to Ossie • • •Ossie
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •Dyfi Osprey Egg and Hatching Data | Dyfi Osprey Project
www.dyfiospreyproject.com