I mean that is basically their last remaining chance to ever turn a profit. Let's hope it is not enough.

I disagree. If you require significant effort to concentrate, you are not cut out to be an academic. Academics do and must do things they are interested in or they will never be any good at them. It is fine to not be cut out to be an academic, most people are not. And we do not need that many academics, really, we just need to take them seriously and listen to them.

That one is very simple: My comments are not ignorant and you are just one of those people that lose all rationality when it comes to kids. That you (apparently) agree on other things with me at least occasionally, should tell you something here.

So, you think what is "on a screen" is not part of the world? Seriously?

It is not that difficult if somebody is this extremely over the line.

Nope. I am right on the mark. And I have thought carefully about that comment. If that cretin were my parent, I would cut all ties as soon as I reasonably could.

Unless you want all your data analyzed, used, sold and lost.

Before the Dot Com era, startups that succeeded transitioned from growth stocks in to blue chips. They settle down, focus on becoming more efficient at executing what is now proven business mode.

But modern tech stocks are expected to act like growth stocks *forever*. When they grow to their natural potential, they begin to turn to dubious practices to generate the next tranche of growth. They undermine their services in order to squeeze a bit more revenue out of them. Or they let their successful business stagnate while the rock star founder beguiles stockholders with visions of transforming into a block chain or AI company.

Back in the early 2000s, when Amazon first transitioned from being a book store to an everything store, and they just introduced Prime membership, you used the site and thought "this thing is great." Nobody thinks that anymore; it's slower, more opaque and less reliable, cluttered with knockoffs, sponsored results, and astroturf reviews. Fake sales events with phony markdowns? Who is surprised?

A friend of mine is extremely fortunate to have a bit more of an 'old school' environment. They have a TV, but she doesn't let her kids use her phone. She's able to be a stay-at-home-mom, supplementing the household income with baked goods and Etsy projects and eggs from her chickens. She pays attention to her kids, not as a helicopter parent, but as a genuinely involved parent - going on walks, taking them to the library, teaching them how to interact safely with the chickens, having them cook with her, teaching them arithmetic and reading, playing with them, giving them simple chores...really making it a point to focus on early childhood education. This in turn is evident in her kids' longer attention spans, and ability to have discussions at levels in excess of their peers.

Something tells me that they will do far better than their peers on standardized tests...not because they had less screen time and spent their formative years staring at the wall instead, but because she's been an active parent and made it a point to make the most of the pre-kindergarten years.

She's an exception, sure...but the point generally stands - parents who just hand their kid an iPad and leave them alone are going to end up with kids focused on entertainment rather than exploring their world and gaining understanding, which will likely be reflected on standardized test scores to some extent.

I would also submit that one of the contributors to this problem is how basically every video game has devolved into a skinner box and dopamine dispenser. Puzzle games exist, but it's an incredibly exhaustive process to load an iPad exclusively with games that are pay-once, no-IAPs. It would be interesting to see if such a thing *could* be used as part of an experimental group, where kids who only played games that had traditional progression mechanics were compared to kids who had games that were colorful slot machines.

... then you are the product. Better stay far away from this poisoned "gift".

Sounds like somebody in delusion trying desperately to justify child abuse.

Your point is pointless. But if you want to die on this hill, be my guest.

Or are the dumbest simply more fascinated by the pretty lights?

For some reason, if it makes things cheaper, many "decision makers" prefer the "bloody stupid" approach.

Indeed. Real liability or things will just get worse. Economics graduates cannot self-regulate, they will just make things cheaper and cheaper until everything breaks.

For really bad failures (such as this one) I would also like to see _personal_ liability of the c-level fuckup responsible.