Live data from Hacker News

California parents could soon sue for social media addiction

apnews.com

61–70 of 225 posts

Re: California parents could soon sue for social media addiction

#61
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you do it (serious question)? I live in US, and like China's approach on this specific issue. 1) Disallow smartphone until certain age. Which age? 2) Allow smartphone, but with parental controls. Which ones? Many of them are hackable. 3) Allow smartphone, but with time of day/week restrictions that you enforce by taking away the phone?

1) We decided for highschool for the first phone. Some parents give smart watches so the kids are contactable but don't have a big screen. 2) I have the Google controls. That said, its as you say kids can circumvent controls so the best thing you can do is have this conversation. We've spoken a buch of times with the kids about how other kids will look at gore/porn out of interest/shock value but they should choose n…

single parents, parents working odd hours, divorced parents - they often must give phones to their kids at earlier ages

are you certain your kids ~~are not sneaking a flashlight under their blankets to read books until dawn~~ do not have a secondary phone to scroll tiktok until dawn, are not learning from friends about vpns, are not browsing porn

when your kids go to school or are away from home can you be certain they are not circumventing all those things you have had the talk about?

Re: California parents could soon sue for social media addiction

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't the same argument be used for cigarettes? "We shouldn't regulate tobacco companies influence on kids because it's a parent's responsibility to prevent that sort of harmful thing"? I agree that this bill is silly, but "parents are responsible for preventing all harm to children" doesn't seem like a universally applicable argument.

But then we go on to legalize Marijuana in California.

? With age restrictions like cigarettes and alcohol.

Re: California parents could soon sue for social media addiction

#63
I don't have children but am closely befriended with a few couples that I see almost every week that do have children. All are of a similar age, and I've seen them grow up from birth to their current age of about 12-14. I wanted to share some observations as a "neutral" observer...

Their first device is the iPad, starting at about 3-4 y/o and I've seen a case as young as 1 y/o. Before the iPad, the children act natural. They play with physical toys, other children, and are exploratory.

There's a short "mixed" period but the iPad pretty quickly starts to dominate, effectively largely replacing other toys and more physical play. You can quite literally see the children retreat from real life and sink into their iPads.

Parents are quite aware of it, they're not neglectful. They have to fight tooth and nail to get their kids to do anything active. Sure enough you can be strict, but the draw to the device seems extremely powerful. They quite simply seem to prefer it over reality.

The iPad age lasts a long time, as smartphones are not in the picture yet. There's a strong network effect. All other children are doing it too, and when they make way to the playground, there's few or no children there. That makes it a societal addiction, not just an individual one, making it even harder for parents to sanction it.

And still I found some hope. When you really pay close and genuine attention to these children, you'll discover that they really still prefer rich in-person human experiences over their device. They're just getting very little of it, only a handful of fleeting moments a day, on a work day. Rushed interactions.

I found this out by the simple act of showing a real and sustained interest. Just asking a bunch of questions and really listening to answers. They seem almost shocked that anybody would bother with that, and I find that the saddest thing.

Further, imagine these kids sitting in a row with iPads, whilst us adults talk. They seem absent-minded, distracted, but they hear everything we say. They're listening, and they're interested. They're not at all the zombies that some think they are.

The iPad seems a filler for a massive void. They're attention starved. And I lay no blame on parents as they truly do their utmost best. Modern life is just too damn fast to allow for slow, lengthy, genuine humane interactions.

By the age of about 11-12, the smartphone arrives and for boys typically also a console. All toys are cleared out because just the smartphone replaces all of them. It's all downhill from here because now they have access to this stuff no matter where they go.

And, they have a richer vocabulary, a larger group of friends or classmates, will have their first go at even more addictive apps, and...it's just absolutely hopeless at this point. To add insult to injury, society digitizing means that also other aspects move to the device, like learning itself. Which they can't, because 5 million distractions are a tap away or a notification pulls them in.

These children just don't stand a chance. They don't really want it, nor do parents want it. But it happens regardless. It's like fighting gravity.

The issue goes far beyond wasting time. They don't know true boredom or down-time. They miss 99% of real communication (in-person) as it's all digital. They're exposed to the extremes of social networks and take it as if this is how the world really works. They're physically inactive and have a short attention span. They don't collaborate but compete as individuals by means of Tiktok, a status competition.

The only counter parents seem to have is not restrictions, rather replacements. Replace useless device time with non-device activities that are genuinely fun and engaging. Not lame things.

And I didn't even talk about sugar yet. Where for me a sugary snack was an infrequent highlight, these kids are stuffing themselves with it. Out of this small group of kids, 2 flat out refuse to eat anything else. And if they don't get it, they'll eat it at a friend's house or when older buy it themselves from their allowance.

I used to think all of this is bad parenting, but seeing it with my own eyes, I changed my mind. These kids grow up in a world of devices and unlimited sugar, which is not the world I grew up in. It is so omnipresent that parents are fighting a losing battle.

These parents ARE taking personal responsibility, but it just doesn't work when the odds are stacked against you like this.

Re: California parents could soon sue for social media addiction

#65
post #5

If only there was a way parents could exert some sort of influence or authority over these children to prevent what they believe is harmful. We could call it “parenting”.

If only parents could exert some sort of influence or authority over others harming their children. We could call it "sueing".

What a lazy, pathetic attitude. Why don't you sue candy makers while you're at it?

If you don't want to perform a parent's job, DON'T HAVE KIDS.

I detest social-media companies in general, but clogging up our courts with this namby-pamby bullshit is offensive to every citizen.

And ugh, just as people were mocking Reddit's declining culture, a couple of them turn around and down-mod this oh-so-hurtful sentiment.

Pull up your big-boy pants and parent your kids, because taxpayers shouldn't be paying for your nanny. They're already paying for your kids' schooling.

Re: California parents could soon sue for social media addiction

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an ideal situation, it's two parents against thousands of software engineers, marketers, corporate psychologists, and their children's many peers. Many adults can't keep themselves from the addiction. How do we expect parents to keep their kids from it? Or, to put it another way, I'm sure the median parent would have much less luck keeping their kids away from social media than they do with porn.

Why don't we just put everyone in a box after they are born and feed them through a straw like a hamster so they can't possibly ever harm themselves? People need to take responsibility for themselves.

Do you think cigarettes and alcohol should be legal for sale to children? What about advertising specifically targeted at getting kids interested and hooked on cigarettes? What about child labor? Why not let just parents decide what's right for their kids?

There's some behaviors of corporations interacting with children that are correctly regulated in the interest of the broader society we live in. It is completely valid to argue that social media specifically isn't harmful enough to regulate, but your comment amounts to snark that implies nothing should be regulated which is a pretty extreme Anarcho-capitalist position to blanket take.

Re: California parents could soon sue for social media addiction

#68
In recent days, I've seen many of these topics discussed by quite well respected First Amendment lawyers on Twitter. The current that ubiquitously runs through their tweets is that their understanding of the 1A informs their advocating for courts to find that the First Amendment prohibits basically any regulation on social media sites including transparency of moderation policies or decisions, identification, regulations concerning hours, any sort of regulation on viral amplification -- this is all protected speech

And their preferred alternative is always, "parents should parent"

I believe I am a huge supporter of free speech and the First Amendment (two different things), but I find this quite frustrating and believe their approach is both unrealistic and turns the First Amendment into a "suicide pact" (https://www.wikiwand.com/en/The_Constitution_is_not_a_suicid...)

Re: California parents could soon sue for social media addiction

#70
post #5

If only there was a way parents could exert some sort of influence or authority over these children to prevent what they believe is harmful. We could call it “parenting”.

In an ideal situation, it's two parents against thousands of software engineers, marketers, corporate psychologists, and their children's many peers. Many adults can't keep themselves from the addiction. How do we expect parents to keep their kids from it? Or, to put it another way, I'm sure the median parent would have much less luck keeping their kids away from social media than they do with porn.

How about require that parents not provide a cell phone to a child before a certain age?
Post reply on HN