“Warping,” maybe; “changing,” undoubtedly.

Everybody writing reflectively about the Internet as it permeated our lives noticed its attenuation of our attention spans.

If, as leftists, we ignore legitimate moral concerns about the sociogenic implications of an enshittified digital landscape, we will not garner the popular support needed to dismantle tech monopolies and create open alternatives.

You can say “phones are not the cause” and in a strict sense you are right, but how are most kids using most phones? How are these uses affecting attention spans, the ability to use language, the social environment? Does it help if we say “screens” instead? If you don’t like Haidt, get it from Carr.

You heard it here first.

Is optimization for engagement a thing? Does it exploit the neurochemistry of addiction? Will anyone who spends any time in an elementary, middle, or high school classroom see students locked onto their screens, watching short-form videos or clicking frantically at gamified “learning apps”?

The idea that this effort to reform the legislature is meaningless if it does not also apply to the executive (a plausible example of “Trump Derangement Syndrome”); and, implying that calling one Democrat a “scumbag” shows bad faith (an attempt to enforce conformity within a political ‘tribe’).

Sherry, it seems to me that your ability to think rationally and compassionately about the issue of corruption in politics has been compromised by your political polarization. It’s called a “duopoly” for a reason.

“This is not only an unserious effort, it’s an attempt to undermine and kill off the only bipartisan legislative vehicle that is gaining momentum. It’s really bad faith all around.”

This is the problem.

Don’t forget about the kids who have been on devices their whole lives and wouldn’t know science if it licked their cheek.