Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access • Hacker News Board

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

#651

Post by insane_dreamer » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:09 PM UTC

fatnoah wrote: post #640

insane_dreamer wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory I agree with you and the other posters on this. But as someone with preteen kids there’s the other side of me that wants to a) protect them from all the actual shit out there, and b) perhaps more importantly encourage them to do something more constructive than mindlessly scrolling through TikTok clips that have no value whatsoever. In fact I’m far more worried about b) than a) because I know they can learn…

As someone with a teen, it's tremendously difficult to navigate, and like all things related to child-rearing, it probably depends on the actual kids in question. For our teen, the rule is that mom and dad have full access to all devices at any time. Technological limits and locks don't seem to be good options, since there are so many ways around them that I think they provide a false sense of security. Also, as teen…

Good point about separating use of social media to stay in touch with and have fun with friends vs doom scrolling

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

#652

Post by AlgorithmicTime » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

Fatnino wrote: post #572

whats_a_quasar wrote: post #518

I think that people aren't giving enough credence to the reason Utah gives for the restrictions: The teen mental health crisis. Social media has radically changed the social lives of adolescents, and as a result anxiety, depression, self harm, and suicide have all skyrocketed. The data on this is not ambiguous [1]. And there's now a lot of evidence that social media and smartphones are the cause of the crisis: they s…

Kids hanging out with classmates on Discord instead of in person certainly leads to a reduction in teen pregnancy

I'm still not convinced teen pregnancy is a bad thing. We evolved to have children pretty young. Running after toddlers is way easier when you're younger than when you're in your 30s.

If I'd had kids at 19, they'd be almost done with high school by now. And if my wife had decided to be a stay-at-home mom at 19, she would have been done with the most time consuming parts long ago and well into whatever she decided to do after that part of her life.

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

#653

Post by BeFlatXIII » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:16 PM UTC

Mezzie wrote: post #499

BeFlatXIII wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How likely is it that today's teens simply check the "I am over 18" box and set themselves a fake birthday that is Jan 1 from 20 years ago? I've been 25 for the past 25 years, after all.

The problem is that you can't easily verify whether someone is 12 or 14 with documentation so the checkbox is all they had. You can easily verify if someone is over 18 and there are systems in place to do so, which means it's highly likely if this takes place that ID is going to be required. (I mean I also just lied after COPPA, but I was pissed to lose so many accounts that I'd signed up for honestly in 95-99.) Are…

Perhaps the kids will start forging ID cards as foreign nationals with completely fictitious ID templates (or just say "not from Utah").

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

#654

Post by AlgorithmicTime » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:18 PM UTC

monksy wrote: post #42

syklep wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software Developer is the most common job in Utah, it's kind of surprising this happened despite that.

It's not surprising at all for Utah. That is a highly Mormon run state that has strong stances on how you should live your life. Even if you are a "goi" (I use the word loosely to illustrate the cultural metaphor in a us v them mentality) to them. What is amazing is that they have this strong stance on how to restrictively govern the people inside their borders, but yet expect to have a western lifestyle support them…

[dead]

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

#655

Post by themitigating » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:26 PM UTC

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.

What if you think is best harms the child? Obviously there's limits you can think it's best to lock your kid in a basement 24/7 right?

I'm not against parental rights but also hate absolute statements like your first sentence

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

#656

Post by themitigating » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:27 PM UTC

norwalkbear wrote: post #650

fknorangesite wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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]

One example?

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

#657

Post by themitigating » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:28 PM UTC

throwaway-blaze wrote: post #582

rayiner wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“WASP” has the specific connotation of northeastern white people of longstanding American lineage. (The term typically excludes southern and Appalachian whites that technically also are Anglo Saxon and Protestant.) Those people are the vanguard of social liberalism today, in states like Massachusetts and Connecticut. In Florida, meanwhile, non-Hispanic whites are just 51% of the population (versus 65-70% in Massachus…

The graphic depiction of underage people engaged in sex acts is against federal law and most likely Texas law as well. It is baffling to me how the media depicts this as "anti trans" or "anti lgbt" book banning while managing to never mention the specifics of the books. I'm about as liberal as they come on social issues. But I don't think these books are appropriate in an elementary or middle school library.

Are all the books being banned pornographic? Is this a way for people to get some books that maybe should be banned but then go after books where gays and trans people are shown in a positive light?

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

#658

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:29 PM UTC

jstarfish wrote: post #615

thomastjeffery wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have recognized a significant part of the motivations behind this, but you're missing a key detail: pornography. The Corporation for the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - which is currently embarrassed to be known colloquially as the Mormon church - has declared "pornography" to be one of the most menacing and dangerous things in our society. Most of the people in Utah's gover…

"Children's privacy" isn't a thing. They are wards of their parents, whose basic fucking job requires they have some clue where the kid is and what they're getting up to. Then you bring up porn, something illegal for children to be accessing anyway. You are aware of this, yes? Shame on parents for daring to uphold the law in their own homes.

[deleted]

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

#659

Post by themitigating » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:32 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #280

Spivak wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There won’t be any. Look, it’s fun to imagine these shitty lawmakers getting bit by their own laws applied to the letter but that’s not how it will go. The law will only ever be enforced against social media platforms they see as threatening their ability to shelter their kids. I think it says a lot about any politician that pushes for laws that are meant to be selectively enforced.

> Look, it’s fun to imagine these shitty lawmakers getting bit by their own laws applied to the letter but that’s not how it will go. The law will only ever be enforced against social media platforms they see as threatening their ability to shelter their kids. It’ll be enforced against whoever individual citizens decide to enforce it against; its a purely private right of action.

Just like Texas did with abortion. Allow citizens, who I'm sure contain some number who want to enforce their morality on others, to enforce the law.

This is fascism. that's it

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

#660

Post by morbia » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:57 PM UTC

stuckinhell wrote: post #648

fknorangesite wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 vision…

> 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 am doing nothing of the sort. In fact, I haven't made any comment towards which I disagree with your actions with regards to your example. I haven't really formulated any opinions on this, and certainly not towards your family. I was wanting an open discourse using a hypothetical scenario and received a rather personal defensive retort in return.

All I believe is LGBT children have a right to be protected, sometimes that is from their own parents. Yes, that is formulated through the lens of my experiences in the same way yours are through being a mother of a child in 2023. I am not trying to push a vision of family, culture or politics, I'm trying to make parents think about this that is all. My hypothetical scenario is not so hypothetical for many families.