We also aspire to a framework where people aren't forced to drive if they don't want to. It should be a choice, not a necessity so you can participate in life. Same with phones/social media. It is why we should be actively creating attractive non-digital spaces for young people - sadly lacking atm

A better analogy is driving. We don't let under 17s drive until they have a licence, for which they have to pass a test. Driving is dangerous compared to not driving, but we put safeguards in place so everyone (driver, highways agency, car makers etc) is legally responsible for safety.

They need infrastructure, services. Park benches, skate parks, dirt tracks, youth clubs, outreach. Litter picking the used cannisters with only minimal judgement. We need to be ready for broken bones - for young people to take risks without us there, and without us tracking their every movement.

Totally agree. This is a two-pronged problem that requires a two-pronged solution, and always has been. We can start by normalising young people in public - which I always try to do.

Like I say, there's a conversation to be had, and I'm not dismissing online relationships at all. But I'm really uneasy about the idea that we let kids, whose brains are still developing, disappear into an online world, however great those online relationships might be.

Two of my best friends I met online too! We went to each other's weddings! But I also had RL relationships that helped me form the social skills I needed to be happy and secure, and arguably fed into those online relationships too. So I would argue they can be wonderful but they're not a substitute.

Not that it matters but I have lived experience as an ND person and as the parent of an ND child. Children are, I believe, are the subject in question here?

You speak of your experience with absolute confidence, but when I speak about mine it's "speaking over people". Got it.

The term ND does not exclusively belong to ND people for whom SM is a lifeline. There is a lot of nuance here that does not get acknowledged, and it's really tiring to watch ND kids who are uniquely vulnerable to tech because of their diversity get ignored or, in your parlance "spoken over".

There's a conversation to be had about how social media works for ND kids for whom RL social interaction is really hard (the "lifeline" theory). But then we also need one about whether online relationships are a substitute to RL equivalents, which require hard-won social skills.

Also a tonne of dangers, to which many ND children are particularly vulnerable. I am really uneasy with how people lump together ND kids (with diff conditions!) as a homogeneous group “benefitting” from SM. They are not a political tool.

Oh god, the pressure. The second season of Game of Thrones?

We also implement strong guard rails on design (seatbelts, safety features), regulation (speed limits) and use (speeding fines, alcohol limits etc). We take measures to mitigate the risks to the best of our ability, and accept what's left. We're nowhere near there with social media or smartphones

I feel like cars are a better analogy for social media. They're useful, a normal part of human existence and can be a ticket to the world. But we know they're inherently dangerous, so we restrict access by age, and train people to use them before allowing unsupervised use.

Also interesting: despite the USA being a frequent topic of discussion, nobody on the podium mentioned Trump by name and almost nobody named the US. The most frequently used wording was “the country to the south”

I actually had an interviewee ask me - after my questions almost entirely focused on their project - if I was going to ask about the upcoming Canadian election. I barely had a chance to say “yeah sure” before they fiercely (and politely) launched into a polemic on Canadian unity

Not unrelated:

www.hydrogeninsight.com/innovation/u...