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

Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 719 posts

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#641

Post by noirscape »

Mezzie wrote: post #442
heavyset_go wrote: post #306

I feel like this is a response to the exponential popularity of sites like r/exmormon among younger generations. For example, look at these exceptions. It seems like organic, unapproved discussion between users is what the bill is trying to stifle: > (D) news, sports, entertainment, or other content that is preselected by the provider and not user generated, ... (Q) to permit comments on a digital news website, if th…

I'd like to add that this may have outsized unintended effects like COPPA did - COPPA being the law that established that accounts online required you to be 13. I was 12 when COPPA went into effect. What a lot of people don't know about COPPA is that there is a provision to allow for children under 13 to have accounts with proven parental permission. My parents would have allowed me - I'd been online for 8 years at t…

The main thing COPPA failed at was that iirc the parent who wanted to allow their child on the platform would have to physically email their approval to the operator of the site in question.

Nobody wanted to make their address accessible/wanted to pass the hordes of physical mail that would end up at that address (see the inherent issues with any public email address and spam), so this quickly fell to the wayside in favor of the pinky promise you're above 13 checkbox.

For what it counts, outside the US, minimum age for this sorta thing (although there it's more about general data processing, not some weird "think of the children" nonsense) is often higher.

Here for example you're not allowed to have a Google account if you're >=16 years old, end of story. Still skippable with a checkbox (and from what I know any teenager just does that), but the age being at 13 is not at all a standard.

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#642

Post by stuckinhell »

morbia wrote: post #633
stuckinhell wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social media is not the same as it was 10 years ago. The level of which kids compare themselves to other kids took an exponential leap to a near hive mind level. Constantly comparing themselves to the instagram people with fake lives, rich kids, or extremely beautiful people is mentally damaging them. My daughter asked me for plastic surgery, and I was dumbfounded. So I went check her internet logs, and she's been wa…

Just to be clear, I am not a parent and I would not be so presumptuous to criticise someone's parenting skills when I have not gone through it. I wholeheartedly agree with you that the internet of 2023 is nothing like 2013 (or 2003 when I was growing up), and I don't think your reaction to the situation you described is wrong. Needless to say, parenting in this era is really, really hard and I don't envy you. However…

Instead of hypothetical, let me be very very clear. It's my child not yours, not the schools, not the governments.

It's my child, that I carried for 9 months. I'll do what I think is best. I don't care about your opinion here in the slightest because at the end of the day you have no connection to my family and aren't responsible for their well being.

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#643

Post by fknorangesite »

stuckinhell wrote: post #642
morbia wrote: post #633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear, I am not a parent and I would not be so presumptuous to criticise someone's parenting skills when I have not gone through it. I wholeheartedly agree with you that the internet of 2023 is nothing like 2013 (or 2003 when I was growing up), and I don't think your reaction to the situation you described is wrong. Needless to say, parenting in this era is really, really hard and I don't envy you. However…

Instead of hypothetical, let me be very very clear. It's my child not yours, not the schools, not the governments. It's my child, that I carried for 9 months. I'll do what I think is best. I don't care about your opinion here in the slightest because at the end of the day you have no connection to my family and aren't responsible for their well being.

> you have no connection to my family and aren't responsible for their well being.

Sure, but you are, and morbia's comment here was a thoughtful call for introspection on your part when considering what that well being entails, exactly. It was not out of place.

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#644

Post by shadowgovt »

14 wrote: post #634
shadowgovt wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how VPN'ing to Canada helps.

This is a Utah law and for now I don’t think most companies will implement it site wide but rather just comply with state laws. So vpn into Canada would not trigger the age verification.

That won't be sufficient for companies to comply with the law. The way Utah's law is structured it is incumbent upon the company to determine whether a user is a Utah citizen or not. I haven't seen anything to suggest the courts will decide that a simple IP address filter is sufficient to be considered compliant.

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#645

Post by fknorangesite »

codeguro wrote: post #639
morbia wrote: post #633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear, I am not a parent and I would not be so presumptuous to criticise someone's parenting skills when I have not gone through it. I wholeheartedly agree with you that the internet of 2023 is nothing like 2013 (or 2003 when I was growing up), and I don't think your reaction to the situation you described is wrong. Needless to say, parenting in this era is really, really hard and I don't envy you. However…

Parents, for their children’s best interests, have a prerogative to control what their children are exposed to. Social media is absolutely within that domain. I’m inclined to believe anyone who disagrees with that principle is a potential predator who seeks to undermine that authority. Sexual preferences are fundamentally sexual in nature, and parents absolutely have the prerogative to gatekeep the kinds of content t…

> strangers on the internet are grooming their sons / daughters to convince them they are gay or trans

This is just the latest bullshit moral panic du jour.

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#646

Post by mixmastamyk »

morbia wrote: post #633
stuckinhell wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social media is not the same as it was 10 years ago. The level of which kids compare themselves to other kids took an exponential leap to a near hive mind level. Constantly comparing themselves to the instagram people with fake lives, rich kids, or extremely beautiful people is mentally damaging them. My daughter asked me for plastic surgery, and I was dumbfounded. So I went check her internet logs, and she's been wa…

Just to be clear, I am not a parent and I would not be so presumptuous to criticise someone's parenting skills when I have not gone through it. I wholeheartedly agree with you that the internet of 2023 is nothing like 2013 (or 2003 when I was growing up), and I don't think your reaction to the situation you described is wrong. Needless to say, parenting in this era is really, really hard and I don't envy you. However…

You may be too deep in the community to appreciate, but younger teens have had family supervision for millennia and for good reason. Their brains are not fully formed yet.

That you can think up a problematic case doesn’t mean we throw out the concept for the other 90% of kids that benefit from involved parents. Some of the rest are suicide risks even when not being harassed. They’d benefit as well.

I personally grew up in a “lord of the flies” environment and wouldn’t recommend it. Would have been nice to have some guidance, even if not perfect.

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#647

Post by mixmastamyk »

PretzelPirate wrote: post #638
camhart wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. I don't think full access to messages is always necessary, but it can be in some circumstances and it should be up to the parent to decide how responsible their child is online and grant privacy accordingly. A 16 year old is still going through tons of life changing events. Everyone needs help charting a course through life, especially at that age. Who better than a loving parent to guide them? Parents sh…

> Who better than a loving parent to guide them? Many of us didn't have loving parents. We had parents who would weaponize any detail they learned about us in order to hurt us. I used the internet to get away from my parents when I physically couldn't.

A constructive solution to that is to call CPS or even run away. Getting hooked on tiktok as you would a drug is not.

I don’t believe this bill blocks iMessage for example.

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#648

Post by stuckinhell »

fknorangesite wrote: post #643
stuckinhell wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of hypothetical, let me be very very clear. It's my child not yours, not the schools, not the governments. It's my child, that I carried for 9 months. I'll do what I think is best. I don't care about your opinion here in the slightest because at the end of the day you have no connection to my family and aren't responsible for their well being.

> you have no connection to my family and aren't responsible for their well being. Sure, but you are, and morbia's comment here was a thoughtful call for introspection on your part when considering what that well being entails, exactly. It was not out of place.

My point was that I am and he isn't. His comment was only thoughtful on his own terms.

His terms aren't universal or acceptable because it's my family not his. He's projecting his personal experience onto my kids, which I've clearly discussed prior is not the same generationally or ever personally.

I'm not alone in this. Parent's are tired of people who have no business in our families trying to push their own visions of family, culture, politics, etc.

That's why home schooling is on the rise in both liberal and conservative circles (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/as-u-s-schools-reopen...).

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#649

Post by sprite »

Mezzie wrote: post #442
heavyset_go wrote: post #306

I feel like this is a response to the exponential popularity of sites like r/exmormon among younger generations. For example, look at these exceptions. It seems like organic, unapproved discussion between users is what the bill is trying to stifle: > (D) news, sports, entertainment, or other content that is preselected by the provider and not user generated, ... (Q) to permit comments on a digital news website, if th…

I'd like to add that this may have outsized unintended effects like COPPA did - COPPA being the law that established that accounts online required you to be 13. I was 12 when COPPA went into effect. What a lot of people don't know about COPPA is that there is a provision to allow for children under 13 to have accounts with proven parental permission. My parents would have allowed me - I'd been online for 8 years at t…

I don’t understand how social media companies will enforce this without requiring an ID for any signup. Even then users could just select another country. Without enforcement this is just as useless as click link to verify you are 18 or enter birthdate.

Re: Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access

#650

Post by norwalkbear »

fknorangesite wrote: post #645
codeguro wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parents, for their children’s best interests, have a prerogative to control what their children are exposed to. Social media is absolutely within that domain. I’m inclined to believe anyone who disagrees with that principle is a potential predator who seeks to undermine that authority. Sexual preferences are fundamentally sexual in nature, and parents absolutely have the prerogative to gatekeep the kinds of content t…

> strangers on the internet are grooming their sons / daughters to convince them they are gay or trans This is just the latest bullshit moral panic du jour.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN