The junkie says What?

Yesterday I was woken up by an incredible story we see got to see on BBC. The world has gone to hell and people died because their only response was that they had bo fibre, no sense of self and an insatiable need for external confirmation. That is how I see it. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c89kdpjn7eqo) gives us ‘‘I was on Instagram all day’ – woman tells landmark trial’ where we see the start giving us “A young woman, who is suing Meta and Google over what she claims is the addictive nature of social media, has told a jury her childhood years were taken over by her use of Instagram and Youtube.” It is actually hard to keep focussed keeping a serious nature here. The idea that she has the gall to claim “what she claims is the addictive nature of social media”, it is almost like the girl who claims that she didn’t know that the penis inserted inserted in the vagina could lead to pregnancy, because it felt so good. It might not be the complete truth (in many ways) but there is something like discipline of the soul. Which is continued by ““I stopped engaging with family because I was spending all my time on social media,” said the woman, who is known as KGM or Kaley, to protect her privacy.

She told the court in Los Angeles that she began using YouTube at the age of 6 and Instagram aged 9 and encountered no barriers to prevent her using them despite her young age.” So at that point? Or at which point are the parents claiming some responsibility in all go this? So when we get “While much of the court proceedings so far have focused on Instagram and Meta, Google’s YouTube is also a defendant in the lawsuit. TikTok and Snapchat were initially sued as well, but the companies settled shortly before the trial was scheduled to begin. The terms of those settlements were not disclosed.” I honestly do not see (I kinda do) why TikTok and Snapchat settled this. The entire manifest of entitlements here are (as I personally see it) completely out of whack. 

So when we get to “Now 20 years old, Kaley told the court that looking at Instagram was “the first thing” she did when she woke up each day and that she continued “all day” until she went to sleep at night, leading to difficulties at school, at home and with her mental health. She also watched YouTube videos for hours on end, noting that the platform’s “autoplay” feature, where a new video starts automatically after the previous one has ended, kept her on it. Failing to get enough “likes” on her social media posts left her feeling “insecure” or “ugly” she said.” So, at what time will the court ask questions of the parents? The word ‘parent’ is not mentioned even once, which with a starting age of 6 (and 9) is a pretty basic setting in any dealing with the optional setting of Doli Incapax, a legal common law principle presuming children aged 10 to under 14 years lack the capacity to be criminally responsible because they cannot distinguish right from wrong. And in that setting the parents are called in to answer a few questions. That is what I would do and the setting that I would press for, and beyond the setting of all of this and YouTube is in the benches for I know what reason, because YouTube has an ‘off’ switch, I press it all the time. I am (at times) a few hours on YouTube, it is how I get information as the News is no longer presented on TV, they call it entertainment and whilst I don’t have the luxury of seeking out all the TV channels at time, they all present their data on YouTube (as well as a few other channels). In all this it is up to me to decide when I need to get food, shop for items and even get to people. And as I am no billionaire (not even a millionaire) I have plenty of reasons to feel insecure, but my mother and father always taught me to “try again at the difficult task until you succeed”, my father was an alcoholic bully, but he did imbue me with a workaholic nature, it is the one part he gave me and that is the part I always saw as good. All other good things came from my mother, except smoking, she was a chain smoker I never took to that stuff. And I turned out pretty decent (or so I believe) at least I got the ball and fumbled it away from DARPA over half a dozen times, I created over half a dozen games (on paper), I wrote several scripts and that was just for starters. I also has tech support person, trainer and consultant for over two decades. As such I started work before that insecure little girl was born. But did I complain? I even released several pieces of what could be known as Apple IP to the public domain. Do I cry? Nope, I am merely putting a footprint on this world and there is a fair chance that over 99.999% of the human population has never heard of me. I personally believe that I matter (unless I move at the speed of light, then I am energy), the question is ‘Do I matter to others?’ I don’t care. I am who I am and I am solid in my convictions, they might be wrong or right. They are mine. So where does this leave you? Do I care? No, not really. Do you care? If yes, you should read something else. Still the BBC gives us “By age 10, she was engaging in self-harm, cutting herself, Kaley said. She has seen a therapist since she was 13. Kaley’s testimony comes a week after she attended court to sit directly across from Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s co-founder and chief executive, as he spent around seven hours being questioned by lawyers, the first time the billionaire had ever appeared before a jury.

Meta’s lawyers have broadly argued that Kaley’s struggles with her mental health stemmed from problems with her family life, not her use of Instagram.” So at this point I ask again, where are the parents? If she was seeing a therapist since 10 they should be in the picture and they are not. Why not? So when we get to “Paul Schmidt, a lead lawyer for Meta, pointed during the first day of the trial to statements Kaley had made prior to filing her lawsuit about her home life, including a difficult relationship with her mother that had led to thoughts of self-harm.” We again see the need for the parents to be included in all off this and where was the father? All this leads to a view of a setting where (as I see it) Mark ‘Facebook’ Zuckerberg has no part in all of this, or at least a lot less then the BBC would like him to be. The only thing I see coming from all this is some loser who is blaming the world for her own undoing. It might seem harsh, but that is the setting I see. I don’t blame others for my lack of a Ferrari (not my favourite car anyway) ad there is so much more I could have achieved, but I believe that is because others never looked in my direction. It was not their job to look in my direction. It was my job to get noticed and putting a few DARPA solutions online is the way to go I say. Also putting the Apple IP ideas online might get me noticed by Timmy the Cook (a culinary expert at that Granny Smith corporation) we work with the tools we have and that is as much as I can do. I don’t cry, I don’t sulk, I merely pick up the next challenge and I solve it or a toss it aside. It is called strength of character, I don’t seek out the ‘approval of the masses’ it has no real function, other then it might get a few ‘likes’ and they don’t translate into real solutions. 

So have a good day and as I am about to enjoy a Saturday breakfast I tell you that I will be OK (Coffee usually gives that warm feeling that I need) is it additive? Yes, I guess so, but I only have one coffee in the morning, that is the consequence of a budget. We all have them and there is no Willy mindset involved (to explain that, it was a character in Popeye) who revered the expression “I’ll gladly pay you tomorrow for a hamburger today”, which is how the United States government does its business and it has done so over 38 trillion times. So, you see how it ends and no President without an exit strategy in that matter will give you any solace here. 

Have a good one