and "a US study reported an increase in recreational screen time of almost 4 h a day in children aged 12–13 years during the COVID-19 pandemic."
Why do you think this is "mostly okay" and why is "mostly okay but getting worse" good enough for you?
> "I view this as a veil for conservatism."
I view this as sticking your head in the sand and trying to distract from it with a cheap insult. By 2030 do you think obesity prevalence will have gone up or down? Screen time? Depression levels? Happiness? Isolation? They've all been trending in bad directions for years, despite COVID. Smartphone apps aren't going to magically get fewer gambling mechanics and dark patterns, two hundred million people aren't magically going to stop responding to advertising and stop eating McDonalds, American cities aren't magically going to turn away from cars and pro-walking.
> "Tiktok fat shaming is bad but leading your “society is dystopia” comment with obesity rates in the US is fine?""
Calling out a public health crisis isn't fat shaming, so yes it's fine.
> "More extensive redistribution rather than moral panic + regulation over tiktok. Let’s not waste time on speculative interventions."
You can't fix juvenile diabetes by taking cash from McDonalds and throwing it at the sick child, or the sick child's doctors. There's nothing speculative about this - companies engineer food to exploit our senses, and engineer advertising to exploit our weaknesses, we know it works, we see the results of it, and we should stop it.
> "view this as a veil for conservatism because they don’t behave the same as you.*"
It isn't about how they behave, it's about why we behave. The why is willful manipulation by companies which want profit and don't care about harming us to get it. The manipulation is effective, coersive, substantial, powerful, abhorrent.
[1] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8...