Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

dallasnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 195 posts

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#101

Post by taylodl »

neilv wrote: post #6

> A North Texas Republican wants to ban social media for Texans under the age of 18. But wait, there's more: > State Rep. Jared Patterson, R-Frisco, filed House Bill 896 this week that would require social media users to show two forms of photo identification to verify their age. Now all services considered social media would have to collect two forms of photo ID from all users, if they didn't want to be illegal in T…

Unintended consequence should this bill ever pass (it likely won't) - every 18 year old would have everything they need to register to vote!

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#102

Post by taylodl »

Shared404 wrote: post #37
falcolas wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This might not only be about protecting the children. Sadly, it never is about protecting the children. It's always about pushing other agendas that are, at best, tangentially aimed at protecting children. For example, holding back Texan teens (aka Gen Z, who had a huge impact on the recent midterms) from being a part of the broader political discussion; from informing themselves before they're able to vote.

This x1000. I live in TX, and it is many people's greatest fear that their kids might start to think differently than their parents.

It is many people's greatest fear that their kids might start to think...

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#103

Post by slowmovintarget »

dpkirchner wrote: post #93
MonkeyMalarky wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here I thought it was all a conspiracy to infect American teens with imaginary mental illnesses.

I thought it was an app intended to show users content they might enjoy enough that they might also view ads between content, all in order to make a profit.

> "I don't understand anything," she said with decision, determined to preserve her incomprehension intact. "Nothing. Least of all," she continued in another tone "why you don't take soma when you have these dreadful ideas of yours. You'd forget all about them. And instead of feeling miserable, you'd be jolly. So jolly, ..." -- Brave New World by Aldous Huxley

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#104

Post by orwin »

Let's be charitable and say the identification is done on a governmental website and the data isn't tracked or used further, nor correlated with voters database. Big assumption

What does using mean? If it's posting publicly on social media? Why not. I mean, if facebook default privacy settings were "private" for the kids and only ascendants (IE parents or legal guardians, and main professor (to allow children withing a class to interact with each other)), its not a great idea, but at least it does "protect the children".

If it's using altogether, i mean, tough luck.

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#106

Post by bradlys »

gffrd wrote: post #100
Shared404 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This x1000. I live in TX, and it is many people's greatest fear that their kids might start to think differently than their parents.

Yikes, really? And what do they fear the impact of this to be? (Honest question)

Cultural change. Loss of their political power. Less consolidation of capital.

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#107

Post by orwin »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #62
scifibestfi wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm amused by the idea that developing brains in particular are being informed, rather than misinformed, by social media. Where did that come from in the age of misinformation and filter bubbles? Adult brains are misinformed by these bubbles, teenage brains are even more vulnerable.

I don't think it's about correctness, just about whether they're allowed to coordinate as a bloc. Last year there was a week where the students at the nearby school stole all of the faucet knobs, towel dispensers, and even a mirror from the bathrooms. The following week they went about doing random acts of absurd "public service" (a TV was installed in the bathroom, poorly). Why? Some meme, no greater explanation. If…

That kind of things is exactly the reason why kids should be allowed social media.

And by the way, in the 2000s, before facebook arrived in my country, we created websites and chatroom spawning entire grades, entire school even. The rumor mill was worse than facebook. I've heard of one of those project (a real website, not just an IRC like in my highschool) was used by students of multiple schools, until it was "hacked" and the admin took it down.

It was a bit discriminatory for kids who didn't had enough money to participate, or for groups of kids who weren't interested enough to get on it (i mean, it _was_ geeky) because there was an entry barrier. If we could've coordinate our stupidity amongst all the students, those years would have been even better, and for them too

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#108

Post by cnelsenmilt »

Dalewyn wrote: post #79
nsxwolf wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's expensive to most regular people.

Most people buy thousand dollar smartphones, among other luxuries. $130 dollars for federally-issued identification that is valid for 10 years is not expensive.

Is $130 plus whatever a state ID costs a reasonable fee to pay (to the government) to access Facebook?

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#109

Post by MonkeyMalarky »

gannonburgett wrote: post #64
warbler73 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This might not only be about protecting the children. When you have verified name and address of every user you can charge a lot more for ads.

Alternatively, those without identification (who are most often marginalized individuals and groups) won't be able to use these platforms with this requirement.

Also a positive for advertisers, marginalized individuals generally aren't flush with disposable income either.
Post reply on HN