Semua Gambar Berita Video Belanja Maps Sosial Media Files Science
Sekitar 10 hasil (3.01 detik)
Komunitas poliversity.it

Libri: “The Campus Series” di Elle Kennedy conquista TikTok. Tra le autrici più amate si confermano Felicia Kingsley e Hazel Riley

Libri: “The Campus Series” di Elle Kennedy conquista TikTok. Tra le autrici più amate si confermano Felicia Kingsley e Hazel Riley @libri https://www.illibraio.it/news/booktok/the-campus-series-tiktok-libri-1501033/ “The Campus Series” di Elle Kennedy conquista non solo le classifiche di vendita, ma anche l’ultima #BookTok Bestseller List. Tra le autrici più amate in Italia su TikTok, si confermano Felicia Kingsley ed Hazel Riley. Tra le new entry in top 20, Freida McFadden e

Komunitas mujico.org

Pasos para re-entrenar tu cerebro y ganar mas libertad mental

El Arte del JOMO (Joy of Missing Out) Primeras 3 horas del día, estas no disponible para nadie, no checas correo o whatsapp, no abres ninguna mensajeria, te bañas, almuerzas, disfrutas la mañana. Permitido musica pero no videos. Evalua tus habitos de consumo, son las redes sociales o video tu trabajo? que ventajas te traen? Videos de DIY son buenos para tus metas personales, pero doomscrolling de videos de tiktok de gentes no haciendo realmente nada?; Si nada de eso te esta ayudando a cumplir tus metas laborales o personales, elimina de tu celular y obligate a solo verlo por PC, asi tu mente al ser perezosa evitara hacerlo tan frecuente. Deja el telefono en tu oficina, no comas con el, si puedes salir a correr a caminar sin el hazlo! Acostumbra a tu mente que no es una extension de tu cuerpo, si no una herramienta. Retrabaja tu pensamiento para aceptar que un celular es como una PC y no como un anillo que llevas siempre. Haz algo analogico, haz una actividad que no requiera internet o mobiles/pc, tocar instrumentos, hacer deporte (sin tener que subir videos sobre eso), leer, jugar juegos de mesa, etc. Si le enseñas al cuerpo que hay metas que se alcanzan de forma analogica tu mente se volverá mas concentrada y ávida. hazte un check up mental y fisico cada tanto: cómo me siento? Me he vuelto un NPC de redes sociales? Como esta mi cuerpo? Qué hay de mi salud fisica? Me siento mas intranquilo? Ansioso? Aletargado? Ultimadamente, hazte a la idea que el mundo virtual existe sin ti, si te vas no cambia nada, ni el discord donde estabas exploto ni las personas con las discutias en facebook o reddit se volvieron millonarias porque no estabas tu para evitarlo. La vida seguirá su curso. Pero tu mente estará más libre. Aceptalo poco a poco: No eres nadie para el internet y eso es grandioso. Me alegra estarmelo perdiendo.

Komunitas piefed.social

Slackline

[email protected] ∀ ∈ {🌳🤸‍♂️🌳} Rules: ✅ Post relevant to slacklines. 💢 Don’t act unethically or in bad faith. E.g., no ad hominem arguments, no plain juvenile behaviour to belittle others. 🚫 No posts that link to Instagram, TikTok, Twitter, or any other corporate billionaire-owned society-eroding cesspools. YouTube is “fine”, for now.

Komunitas news.abolish.capital

Reform and Restore activists kick off in Makerfield

TikTok user Carl Fairhurst has recorded an agitated encounter between Reform UK and Restore Britain. It’s yet more evidence the two parties are very, very upset with one another. Restore and Reform are beefing in Makerfield. pic.twitter.com/Z94a0CYm01 — Mukhtar (@I_amMukhtar) June 15, 2026 Let them fight Restore is a Reform breakaway party which exists because the latter party wasn’t right-wing enough. In the video above, a Restore-branded Land Rover has pulled up in front of a Reform-branded bus. It’s hard to make out what’s going on, but men from each camp are yelling at one another. At one point, a man wearing a ‘Restore Britain’ t-shirt says: We’re Restore, mate. We’re Restore Britain. Either he forgot he had the t-shirt on, or he assumed the guy filming couldn’t read. Either way, it’s not the best look. One Farage fanboy responded by crying, saying that they’d been bullied: This isn’t the look that Restore thinks it is. Bullying an ordinary bloke who is simply driving a Reform bus, is utterly embarrassing.pic.twitter.com/N9jCFWFv7z — Ben Graham (@BenGrahamUK) June 15, 2026 Not sure this is the strongest argument, given that Reform is a ‘might-makes-right’ party. We all know the Farage-led party can give it, so why can’t they take it? Here’s another example. Isabel Oakeshott complaining some Restore members are aggressive on social media. I had Nigel Farage’s good friend Raheem Kassam taunting me about being glassed in the face a couple of weeks ago… https://t.co/N4rs0IcmB9 — (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) June 15, 2026 Breakaway As Dan Hodges noted, it’s difficult for Reform to attack Restore, because Restore is just Reform on Berocca: Something quite surreal about watching Reform’s current strategy for dealing with Restore. “They’re racists. They’re going to split the vote. They only exist on social media. They’re not a national party. They don’t have serious policies”. Identical to the attacks on Reform… — (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) June 15, 2026 Honestly, it’s like watching I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter criticise butter. Reform is trying to paint its rivals as an extremist far-right party: I am absolutely disgusted by this Brendan!!! We sat for 45 mins talking. You have let me down. You promised me you would be fair and honest about our conversation. We had a lovely, open and honest discussion and shared practically the same views. We come from similar backgrounds… — Orla Minihane (@orlaminihane) June 15, 2026 The problem with this line of attack is who is it for? Because the voters who want Reform/Restore style politics are going to see it and think: ‘Oh, so I guess Restore is the real deal, and Reform is just another controlled opposition party‘. The leader of Advance UK — another Reform breakaway party — had this to say: All eyes now on the Makerfield result. If Restore polls over 5% that would be a first in British political history. If it polls over 10% that would be seismic. There can be no bleating from Reform. Restore’s existence is Reform’s fault. — Ben Habib (@benhabib6) June 14, 2026 And this is true. As we reported, Restore exists because of the inherent contradictions in Reform’s policy platform: As an example of this, take Zia Yusuf. Yusuf is one of Reform’s most prominent politicians, and he’s constantly arguing that white people are the most oppressed group in the UK… If you’re a far-right voter who buys into this, why would you vote for the party with Zia Yusuf and Suella Braverman in it? Why wouldn’t you vote for the all-white Restore Britain, which is more obviously following through on Reform’s propaganda? If Restore didn’t exist, voters would possibly just ignore these contradictions. Because it does, it’s impossible for many to buy into what Farage is selling. And that’s why Restore might be on the verge of preventing a Reform victory in Makerfield: Makerfield | Burnham leads by 5pts: Lab: 45% (-) Ref: 40% (+8) Res: 8% (+8) Grn: 3% (-1) Con: 2% (-9) Lib: 1% (-6) Via @Moreincommon_, 28 May – 12 June — +/- vs GE2024 pic.twitter.com/2wQdBsZ3fL — Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) June 13, 2026 The shift The problem with pursuing a political project that constantly shifts right is the ground can shift beneath your feet. It happened to the Tories in 2024, and it’s happening to Reform now. In other words, it’s no wonder it’s all kicking off. Featured image via X (Twitter) / the Canary By Willem Moore From Canary via This RSS Feed.

Komunitas news.abolish.capital

Letting Big Tech Off the Hook, UK Kids' Social Media Ban Called 'Right Diagnosis' But 'Wrong Prescription'

It’s not yet clear whether Australia’s ban on social media for children under age 16 has had a positive impact on kids’ mental health and safety, but British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Monday that the country’s law is being used as a model for the United Kingdom’s own blanket ban—leading critics, including the parent of a child who died by suicide after viewing harmful content on social media, to question whether Starmer was simply opting for a “politically expedient” solution to the harms of online platforms. Banning young teenagers and children from using social media, said advocacy groups, does nothing to ensure powerful tech companies will make their products safer by design for all users. Starmer announced the ban online in a video in which he highlighted his support for the policy “as a parent as much as a prime minister,” and noted that in public comments, “thousands of parents” said their children “are addicted to social media.” We are banning social media access for under 16s. These days kids must find their feet in a world where technology intrudes into every area of their life. I just can’t let that go on anymore. So we’re giving children their childhoods back. pic.twitter.com/jn7iQrcwk8 — Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 15, 2026 “It can leave them trapped in a cycle of endless scrolling that displaces play, sleep, and time with the family,” said the prime minister, who leads the Labour Party and is facing threats to his leadership following the party’s major losses in May’s elections. “It can harm their mental health, and frankly, parents need our support on this. That is why today the government has decided to ban social media access for children under 16.” Starmer said new age-related regulations for social media platforms including TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat, as well as gaming and livestreaming platforms, will be introduced by the end of this year, with the new laws going into effect in early 2027. The government also said it was examining restrictions for users under 18, such as “overnight curfews” and mandated blocking of “infinite scrolling.” More details about the ban are expected to be released next month. But Kerry Moscoguiri, chief executive of Amnesty International UK, said that removing children from platforms that broadcast harmful content is “a case of the right diagnosis but the wrong prescription.” “The UK government is right to recognize that many children face serious harms online," said Moscoguiri. “Too many social media companies have built products and business models that prioritize keeping children engaged for longer, often at the expense of their well-being, privacy, and rights.” “But the problem is not that children exist on social media; it’s that social media companies have built platforms that are unsafe by design," she added. “Banning under-16s risks treating children as the problem rather than addressing the companies and systems that create the risks in the first place.” The ban comes after mounting reports of Big Tech companies’ efforts to keep all users, including young people, on their platforms for as long as possible using algorithms and “infinite scrolling.” Numerous cases have linked children’s suicides to their exposure to thousands of posts regarding self-harm and suicidal ideation, as well as to cyberbullying through social media. And reporting by Reuters last year revealed that Meta’s artificial intelligence chatbots were permitted by the company to have sexually provocative conversations with minors. Advocacy groups like Amnesty have called for restrictions on social media platforms’ most addictive and manipulative features, such as infinite scrolling, autoplay, and hyper-personalized recommendations. Moscoguiri warned that bans like the one imposed by Australia last year will force children “to surrender their privacy in order to participate in modern digital life.” In Australia, companies are required to perform age verification by collecting data from bank accounts or scanning users’ photo IDs. Instead of a blanket ban, she said, "we need strong regulation that tackles surveillance-based business models, protects children’s data, and puts safety ahead of profit.” “The responsibility for children’s safety should rest first and foremost with the companies that build and profit from these platforms," said Moscoguiri. “Government action should focus on ending invasive profiling of children, [and] tackling addictive and manipulative design features.” As children’s safety groups in the UK were expecting Starmer’s announcement in recent days, Ian Russell, chair of the Molly Rose Foundation and the father of a 14-year-old girl who died by suicide in 2017 after viewing content related to self-harm and suicide on social media, told the BBC that he was, “quite frankly, dismayed” that a blanket ban was likely coming to the UK. “Keir Starmer promised to tighten up the online safety world by regulating better,” said Russell, who has called for social media giants like Meta to remove and regulate content that’s harmful to young users’ mental health. “If he’s playing politics, what he’s doing is gambling with young people’s lives, and I find that deplorable.” https://t.co/oqDAdFFI8p Very strong words ahead of expected social media ban from @mollyroseorg - Ian Russell tells us govt is rushing in a blanket ban, rather than more sophisticated controls, under political pressure, in a ‘deplorable way’ pic.twitter.com/AMxcleLixU — Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) June 13, 2026 In Australia, which last year became the first country to impose a nationwide blanket ban on kids under 16 using social media, the law has had unclear benefits, with many young teens still managing to use the platforms—where Big Tech has not been forced to place controls that would make it safer for young users to be there. Carole Cadwalladr, an investigative journalist, said that imposing a ban that includes age verification, as Australia’s does, “looks like rushed populist techsolutionism that will hand more power to the platforms.” “This is going to hand even more surveillance powers to the very companies that already know way too much about us. Do you want [X executive chair] Elon [Musk] to have a copy of your biometrics? Do you want [Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg] to scan your face? That’s what we will all be doing,” Cadwalladr added. “This isn’t reining in Silicon Valley power. It’s gifting them even more power. Of course, parents want these companies safe and regulated but that’s a job for government, not the end user.” Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, acknowledged that he has advocated for a ban on social media for children under 16 and called it “the right step to protect young people”—but said the UK government must impose restrictions on social media giants themselves, not just their most vulnerable users. “Bans only treat the symptom, not the problem,” said Khan. “Social media companies need to reimagine their platforms so they can offer a safe and healthy environment for all users, where restricting access wouldn’t be necessary.” “There’s nothing inevitable about algorithms which feed us a diet of dangerous content,” he added. “Londoners deserve platforms which prioritize people, not just profit.” From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.