Live data from Hacker News

The case for banning children from social media

newyorker.com

21–30 of 593 posts

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#21
I'd rather not have to provide my ID and verify my identity like on certain crypto exchanges to watch a youtube video or like a friends post on instagram.

I can't see any other implementation of this working, instead we'd have 2 popups now every time we visit a new site. One for cookies, the other to say "yes I'm over 18".

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#25
post #8

What is social media? My daughters use messaging more than they use TikTok, IG, or BeReal. They send 100s of messages to each other in a span of 5 mins. However, even within their close circle of friends, I see the same social issues (peer pressure, need for validation, etc.).

I do wonder sometimes how much of the supposed ills of social media are just social media making things that were already happening much more visible. I and many others were bullied relentlessly at school through regular non technological means, and I'm sure it had a pretty negative psychological impact. I'm not really convinced it would be any worse if I was more active on Instagram/TikTok/whatever.

As you ask, how many ills is it actually directly causing versus merely exposing.

As op asks, what even is social media? Does email count? An email based mailing list? A federated group chat protocol like Matrix?

Speaking of federated protocols. Email, Matrix, Activity Pub, many others are federated and self hostable. How is legislation supposed to account for that without causing more problems than it seeks to solve?

On that note, are the downstream negative effects of such legislation even being considered? If one of the outcomes is "provide copy of your passport to register a user account" would that not be a situation rife for abuse, both by governments and corporations alike? Is this a "cure" for which the combined side effects are worse than the original problem?

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#26
post #5

> These bills will likely face considerable constitutional challenges. Previous attempts to block minors from accessing Web sites via broad legislation, including the Child Online Protection Act, from 1998, have been struck down on First Amendment grounds. You might get farther instead of banning children from social media, ban all ads to children on social media. Every single ad impression shown to a child is a $1,0…

have fun uploading a copy of your passport every time you visit a new domain then.

[dead]

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#27

> These bills will likely face considerable constitutional challenges. Previous attempts to block minors from accessing Web sites via broad legislation, including the Child Online Protection Act, from 1998, have been struck down on First Amendment grounds. You might get farther instead of banning children from social media, ban all ads to children on social media. Every single ad impression shown to a child is a $1,0…

Hrm. I'm not a big fan of this proposal, but I think that implementation would be technically interesting.

Say we create a "this is a child" header, which would be sent with all HTTP requests and would mandate that the user not be tracked or advertised to. Great solution, except that everybody would immediately switch the header on because everybody hates ads. In effect, everybody wants to be a child.

So now online services fight back and say "okay, well, TikTok is only for adults anyway, you must be 18 to use it, so if this header is present, you can't use TikTok." So adults turn the header back off, and kids go back to lying about being 18.

Except for this to have teeth, we have to say that "a user's promise that they are an adult is insufficient to avoid the fine." So now we waltz into the realm of porn sites in the 1990s or Truth Social today: enter a valid credit card number to prove that you are an adult, or maybe take a photo of yourself holding your driver's license and submit it to TikTok for approval. Ick.

Okay, so let's go further. Let's say that there's a Government Identity office that, when you turn 18, grants you an Adult Citizen ID# security key that lets you verify your identity digitally. That has the upside of solving a bunch of identity problems. You could imagine using it for voting, banking, signing contracts digitally, proving eligibility to work and citizenship. But also lets you verify to websites that you're an adult. Downside: easier than ever for governments and everybody else to reliably track you and cross-reference you between databases. Less great.

But also, I'm not going to choose to "prove I'm an adult" to most of the Internet, just the sites I want to use. Proving I'm an adult is the same as telling them exactly who I am. Ain't no way I want to do that. Ads on random websites are dead. Google's dead overnight unless they require that I log in just to use it (which presumably they would, and I don't care for that at all). Now using the Internet in incognito mode becomes practically impossible.

YouTube has a lot of product placement. Is Mark Rober going to get fined if I show my kids his videos? On the other hand, Ryan and Blippi become illegal. Actually, I'm suddenly 100% on board with this.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#28
post #15

> These bills will likely face considerable constitutional challenges. Previous attempts to block minors from accessing Web sites via broad legislation, including the Child Online Protection Act, from 1998, have been struck down on First Amendment grounds. You might get farther instead of banning children from social media, ban all ads to children on social media. Every single ad impression shown to a child is a $1,0…

The majority of Instagram posts are ads, whether actual advertisements or not. This would be almost impossible to enforce.

Actually, it would be quite simple.

- Record a social media site advertising to a user who is under XX years old. Complain to a portal.

- Fine $1000 x complaint received each month.

- Continue to do so until the service's accounts satisfy some sort of auditing standard.

Come on, we do this for all kinds of things like credit card information and other data certifications.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#29
post #6

> These bills will likely face considerable constitutional challenges. Previous attempts to block minors from accessing Web sites via broad legislation, including the Child Online Protection Act, from 1998, have been struck down on First Amendment grounds. You might get farther instead of banning children from social media, ban all ads to children on social media. Every single ad impression shown to a child is a $1,0…

> If you do that, social media companies will figure out how to keep kids from accessing their site. Nah. The marginal cost of a cigarette is tiny compared to the lifetime revenue of an addict. The marginal cost of a some GBs is even lower than that of a cigarette, and the lifetime revenue of a social media addict is enormous.

I wonder what the lifetime value of the "average" HN participant is, if HN leads to YC backing just one company per year that eventually become a unicorn.
Post reply on HN