Scroll Until Something Breaks

Se trata de reconocer que hay una etapa del desarrollo neurológico en la que la exposición continua a estos sistemas de validación social es particularmente dañina.

It's about recognizing that there's a stage of neurological development in which continuous exposure to these social validation systems is particularly harmful.

The validation loop is key.

It's not passive consumption like watching television.

It's an active, real-time feedback system tied to social identity at precisely the age when social identity is the most precarious thing in a person's life.

Y además está diseñado así deliberadamente.

And moreover it's deliberately designed that way.

Eso es lo que me parece más difícil de defender: los propios documentos internos de Meta, filtrados hace unos años, mostraban que sabían perfectamente que Instagram era especialmente dañino para las adolescentes y decidieron no publicar esos resultados.

That's what I find hardest to defend: Meta's own internal documents, leaked a few years ago, showed they knew perfectly well that Instagram was especially harmful to teenage girls and decided not to publish those findings.

No es ignorancia.

It's not ignorance.

Es una decisión empresarial.

It's a business decision.

I covered the Facebook Papers coverage pretty closely.

And what struck me wasn't even the cynicism, which I'd expect.

It was the scale.

They had the data.

They ran the experiments.

They knew.

Entonces llega un gobierno y dice: bien, si vosotros no vais a proteger a los niños, lo hacemos nosotros.

Then a government comes along and says: fine, if you won't protect children, we will.

Y ahí empieza el debate de verdad, porque la pregunta no es si el daño existe, sino si una ley puede realmente reducirlo.

And that's where the real debate begins, because the question isn't whether the harm exists, but whether a law can actually reduce it.

Which brings up enforcement.

Because a determined fifteen-year-old and a fake birthday are not a particularly difficult combination.

Sí, ese es el argumento que más se repite.

Yes, that's the argument that gets repeated most.

Y es verdad que la verificación de edad es técnicamente complicada.

And it's true that age verification is technically complicated.

Pero yo aquí haría una distinción: que algo no sea perfectamente aplicable no significa que no valga la pena intentarlo.

But I'd draw a distinction here: that something isn't perfectly enforceable doesn't mean it's not worth trying.

Las leyes sobre el alcohol no eliminan el consumo adolescente, pero sí lo reducen considerablemente.

Laws about alcohol don't eliminate adolescent consumption, but they do reduce it considerably.

El objetivo no es la perfección, es el cambio de norma.

The goal isn't perfection, it's changing the norm.

The norm-change argument is actually more powerful than the enforcement argument.

Because what a law does, even an imperfectly enforced one, is shift the default.

Right now the default is: you're twelve, here's TikTok.

The law says the default has to be the other direction.

Exacto.

Exactly.

Y además, si la responsabilidad de verificar la edad recae sobre las plataformas, y no sobre los usuarios, cambia completamente quién asume el riesgo legal.

And furthermore, if the responsibility for age verification falls on the platforms, not the users, it completely changes who bears the legal risk.

Eso sí puede mover montañas, porque las empresas tecnológicas responden a incentivos económicos y jurídicos de una forma que no responden a los llamamientos morales.

That can move mountains, because tech companies respond to economic and legal incentives in a way they don't respond to moral appeals.

Although here's the wrinkle that I find genuinely thorny.

Robust age verification requires collecting more personal data from users, which creates its own privacy risks, especially for minors.

You're solving a privacy-adjacent problem by creating a different privacy problem.

Es una paradoja real.

It's a real paradox.

Para proteger a los niños de que las empresas acumulen datos sobre ellos, tienes que pedirles que aporten más datos que confirmen quiénes son.

To protect children from companies accumulating data about them, you have to ask them to provide more data confirming who they are.

No tengo una solución limpia para eso.

I don't have a clean solution for that.

Creo que nadie la tiene todavía.

I think nobody does yet.

That's an honest answer.

And it's worth sitting with, because a lot of the policy debate glosses over it.

Lo que sí me parece claro es que la alternativa, que es no hacer nada y esperar a que las plataformas se autorregulen, ha demostrado ser una fantasía durante veinte años.

What does seem clear to me is that the alternative, doing nothing and waiting for platforms to self-regulate, has proven to be a fantasy for twenty years.

El modelo europeo, con el RGPD y ahora la Ley de Servicios Digitales, al menos pone el marco legal.

The European model, with GDPR and now the Digital Services Act, at least sets the legal framework.

No resuelve todo, pero crea la posibilidad de exigir responsabilidades.

It doesn't resolve everything, but it creates the possibility of holding parties accountable.

The contrast with the United States is stark.

The surgeon general has been calling for warning labels on social media for over a year.

Congress has held hearings.

And essentially nothing has moved, because the lobbying infrastructure is enormous and both parties have complicated relationships with Silicon Valley.

Esa es la diferencia estructural entre Europa y Estados Unidos en este tema.

That's the structural difference between Europe and the United States on this issue.

En Europa, a diferencia de en Estados Unidos, existe una tradición más arraigada de que el estado tiene legitimidad para proteger a los ciudadanos de los excesos del mercado, incluido el mercado de la atención.

In Europe, unlike in the United States, there's a more deeply rooted tradition that the state has legitimacy to protect citizens from market excesses, including the attention market.

No es que en Europa seamos más listos;

It's not that we in Europe are smarter;

es que el punto de partida ideológico es distinto.

it's that the ideological starting point is different.

Though I'd push back gently on that framing.

The US did regulate tobacco, eventually.

It took decades, it took internal documents being subpoenaed, it took state attorneys general suing, but it happened.

The question is whether we can afford to wait that long with this.

No podemos, y ahí está la urgencia real.

We can't, and that's where the real urgency lies.

Con el tabaco, el daño era físico y acumulaba con los años.

With tobacco, the damage was physical and accumulated over years.

Con esto, el daño ocurre en una ventana muy específica del desarrollo cerebral, la adolescencia temprana, y hay investigadores que argumentan que algunos de esos efectos en la plasticidad neuronal pueden ser permanentes.

With this, the damage occurs in a very specific window of brain development, early adolescence, and some researchers argue that certain effects on neural plasticity may be permanent.

No estamos hablando de un hábito que se puede corregir a los cuarenta.

We're not talking about a habit that can be corrected at forty.

That point about developmental windows is underreported.

The teenage brain is genuinely different, not metaphorically different.

The prefrontal cortex is still forming.

The sensitivity to social rejection is neurologically heightened.

And we handed that brain a machine specifically engineered to exploit those sensitivities.

Y luego nos sorprende que haya una generación con niveles de ansiedad sin precedentes.

And then we're surprised there's a generation with unprecedented anxiety levels.

Tengo sobrinas, tengo hijos de amigos, y lo que veo cuando los observo con el teléfono no es ocio, es trabajo.

I have nieces, I have children of friends, and what I see when I watch them with their phones isn't leisure, it's work.

Es un trabajo social constante y agotador del que no se puede desconectar porque la presión del grupo es permanente.

It's constant, exhausting social labor you can't disconnect from because the peer pressure is permanent.

My daughter, who's in her late twenties now, was just old enough to have had a childhood mostly before smartphones.

She's told me she thinks that matters.

And she also says she watches her younger cousins and genuinely worries.

Eso que describes es un experimento natural muy valioso.

What you describe is a very valuable natural experiment.

Las personas que crecieron en la transición, que tuvieron adolescencia analógica y vida adulta digital, tienen una perspectiva que los que nacieron directamente dentro del ecosistema no pueden tener fácilmente.

People who grew up in the transition, who had an analog adolescence and a digital adult life, have a perspective that those born directly inside the ecosystem can't easily have.

Y casi todos dicen lo mismo: que noten la diferencia, que sean conscientes de algo que los más jóvenes no pueden comparar porque no conocen otra cosa.

And almost all of them say the same thing: that they notice the difference, that they're aware of something the younger ones can't compare because they don't know anything else.

So then, where does this law actually land?

My honest read is it matters more as a signal than as an enforcement mechanism, at least initially.

It says: we as a society have decided this is not acceptable for children.

That is not nothing.

Estoy de acuerdo en eso, aunque añadiría que el diablo estará en los detalles de implementación.

I agree on that, though I'd add that the devil will be in the implementation details.

Si dentro de dos años las plataformas siguen accesibles para cualquier niño de doce años que mienta sobre su fecha de nacimiento, la ley habrá fracasado en lo sustancial aunque haya tenido éxito simbólico.

If in two years the platforms are still accessible to any twelve-year-old who lies about their date of birth, the law will have failed substantively even if it succeeded symbolically.

Y ese fracaso puede ser peor que no haber legislado, porque da la sensación de que se hizo algo cuando no se hizo nada real.

And that failure can be worse than not having legislated at all, because it gives the impression that something was done when nothing real was done.

The implementation window is probably two to three years before you know whether it has real teeth.

And a lot depends on whether the EU follows and whether the major platforms face coordinated legal pressure across multiple jurisdictions simultaneously, because that's the only pressure that moves them.

Y en eso España tiene un papel que jugar.

And Spain has a role to play in that.

Llevamos varios años debatiendo sobre el uso del móvil en las escuelas, algunas comunidades autónomas ya lo han restringido dentro de las aulas, y hay una presión política creciente para ir más lejos.

We've spent several years debating mobile use in schools, some autonomous communities have already restricted it inside classrooms, and there's growing political pressure to go further.

Si el Reino Unido funciona, si Australia funciona, el argumento de que esto es políticamente imposible se desmorona.

If the UK works, if Australia works, the argument that this is politically impossible crumbles.

I want to linger on Spain for a second, because I know you've followed this closely.

What's the cultural context there?

Is there a generational divide in how Spanish parents and children are thinking about this?

Hay una angustia parental muy real que reconozco en mi entorno.

There's a very real parental anxiety I recognize in my own circle.

Los padres españoles de mi generación, los que ahora tenemos entre cuarenta y cinco y cincuenta y cinco años, dimos smartphones a nuestros hijos a los doce, a los trece, porque era lo que hacía todo el mundo y no había marco de referencia para cuestionar esa decisión.

Spanish parents of my generation, those of us now between forty-five and fifty-five, gave smartphones to our children at twelve, at thirteen, because it was what everyone did and there was no frame of reference to question that decision.

Ahora miramos atrás y muchos lo lamentamos, aunque no lo diríamos en voz alta porque equivaldría a admitir que cometimos un error con nuestros propios hijos.

Now we look back and many of us regret it, although we wouldn't say it out loud because it would be equivalent to admitting we made a mistake with our own children.

That's a remarkable thing to say out loud.

And I think it's true of my generation of American parents too.

There was a period where giving a kid a smartphone felt like giving them access to the world.

It was supposed to be a gift.

Exactamente.

Exactly.

Y eso es lo que hace que este debate sea tan incómodo: implica que una generación entera de padres bien intencionados y bien informados tomó una decisión masivamente equivocada con sus propios hijos.

And that's what makes this debate so uncomfortable: it implies that an entire generation of well-intentioned and well-informed parents made a massively wrong decision with their own children.

No por negligencia, sino por ignorancia de las consecuencias, que era una ignorancia en parte fabricada por las propias empresas.

Not from negligence, but from ignorance of the consequences, an ignorance that was partly manufactured by the companies themselves.

Eso es difícil de procesar.

That's hard to process.

There was actually a phrase you used a few minutes ago that I want to circle back to, because it stuck with me.

You said the platforms "responden a incentivos económicos" in a way they don't respond to moral appeals.

I keep thinking about that construction, "responden a." Because in English we'd just say "respond to," but I feel like there's something in the Spanish that sounds more...

inevitable.

Like it's describing a law of physics.

Eso que notas tiene que ver con algo más general: en español, muchas veces usamos el presente de indicativo para describir verdades que consideramos permanentes o estructurales.

What you're noticing has to do with something more general: in Spanish, we often use the present indicative to describe truths we consider permanent or structural.

'El agua moja,' 'el fuego quema,' 'Meta responde a sus accionistas.' No hay condicional, no hay matiz de incertidumbre.

'Water wets,' 'fire burns,' 'Meta answers to its shareholders.' There's no conditional, no hint of uncertainty.

Es una afirmación categórica disfrazada de descripción.

It's a categorical statement disguised as a description.

So it's a rhetorical choice, not just a grammatical default.

Using the flat present tense to make something sound like settled fact rather than interpretation.

Completamente.

Completely.

Y los escritores y periodistas lo usamos de forma consciente.

And writers and journalists use it consciously.

Si yo digo 'Meta puede responder a sus accionistas' o 'Meta tiende a responder,' estoy abriendo la puerta a la excepción, al matiz.

If I say 'Meta can respond to its shareholders' or 'Meta tends to respond,' I'm opening the door to the exception, to nuance.

Si digo 'Meta responde,' estoy cerrando esa puerta.

If I say 'Meta responds,' I'm closing that door.

El verbo en presente sin modificadores tiene una contundencia que en español es muy difícil de replicar con otros medios.

The verb in the unmodified present has a forcefulness in Spanish that's very hard to replicate through other means.

That is genuinely useful.

Because when I try to read a Spanish newspaper op-ed, I'm often struck by how declarative and confident the writing sounds compared to English journalism, which tends to hedge more.

Now I understand part of what's creating that effect.

It's the bare present doing heavy rhetorical lifting.

Y ahora que lo sabes, vas a empezar a verlo en todas partes.

And now that you know it, you're going to start seeing it everywhere.

Es una de esas cosas que una vez que se te enciende la bombilla no puedes desencenderla.

It's one of those things that once the lightbulb switches on you can't switch it back off.

Bienvenido al español como lengua de personas que tienen opiniones y no se disculpan por tenerlas.

Welcome to Spanish as the language of people who have opinions and don't apologize for having them.

You say that like it's a compliment to the language and not a personal character trait you've cultivated over forty-seven years.

Las dos cosas pueden ser verdad al mismo tiempo, Fletcher.

Both things can be true at the same time, Fletcher.

Algo que también aprenderás si sigues practicando el español.

Something you'll also learn if you keep practicing your Spanish.