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

The case for banning children from social media

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 593 posts

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#401

Post by account42 »

gambiting wrote: post #219
meowkit wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Video games nowadays are just as bad. Children don't really watch TV (anecdotally). They watch YouTube, which is just as bad. The key difference between television and video games of yore is the feedback loop. TV and video games were one shot deployed and then ratings were gathered after, averaging across the entire audience. Now YT and video games don't have end states - same thing as social media. While you often w…

>>Video games nowadays are just as bad I literally don't understand how anyone can say that - there are more games of any genre than ever before. Yes if you only play CoD and nothing else it's all monetised and algorithm driven to hell. But for every CoD there are literally thousands of games that tell incredible and beautifully crafted stories. Thousands more where the focus is on gameplay. Endless remakes and reima…

You are arguing a strawman. GP did not claim that all games were bad, but that the situation is as bad as with social media. That there are many high value games is irrelevant if what gets the most play time are the skinner boxes with psychologist on staff whose job it is to make the game as addicting as possible so that people end up spending more on "micro" transactions.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#402

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

rendall wrote: post #395

> " The case for banning children from social media " As a parent, I was looking forward to an article discussing reasons for banning children from social media. What are the philosophical implications? Mental health? Psychosocial? Rather, it seems the article begged that particular question and then discussed legal obstacles and consequences instead. Not the journalist's fault. Misleading headlines are the curse of…

FWIW, there is value to this discussion reaching mainstream as limited as it is.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#403

Post by _heimdall »

tastysandwich wrote: post #46

I just don't see any alternatives to banning social media, perhaps even up to the age of 18. The dopaminergic effects are not dissimilar to drugs and social media is just as addictive. It's not clear how you could effectively regulate this stuff - especially in our highly polarised political climate. The right will immediately target "wokeness", and the left will immediately target "hate speech". And the kids will be…

If it's clear that social media is terrible for children (and I'd argue it's terrible for everyone), why can't we leave it up to parents to stop their kids from using it?

I'm not sure how realistic it would be to enforce ban on social media under a certain age. The ban would have to be enforced on social media companies but they'd likely only be held to doing a best effort solution. They already set a minimum age at 13 for creating a social media account but that hasn't stopped kids from getting into TikTok, Instagram, etc

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#404

Post by emptystation »

cubefox wrote: post #359
rsolva wrote: post #208

A new law in the EU will ban showing ads and using personal data for kids. Here in Norway we have had general ban on showing ads to kids for decades, but it was made in the TV age and has not been enforced on social media. We can't outright ban social media (for a lot of different reasons), but we can regulate away the most harmfull aspects. One of the fundemental underlying problems is the lack of good privacy laws.…

I don't think that ads are the main problem of social media. It's rather the way they replace personal physical relationships with scrolling.

Ads insensitive platforms to design a more and more addictive infinite feed. If they cannot profit from children scrolling endlessly, why would they want to enable children to scroll endlessly? If ads for children on social media are banned (somehow), kids' feeds will probably just become way more boring.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#405

Post by rsolva »

charlieyu1 wrote: post #394
rsolva wrote: post #208

A new law in the EU will ban showing ads and using personal data for kids. Here in Norway we have had general ban on showing ads to kids for decades, but it was made in the TV age and has not been enforced on social media. We can't outright ban social media (for a lot of different reasons), but we can regulate away the most harmfull aspects. One of the fundemental underlying problems is the lack of good privacy laws.…

Now I am a bit curious. Does it mean there were no Kindle or Toysrus or similar ads on TV in Norway?

I do not have kids and do not watch much TV, but I have never seen a commercial for Toysrus or any other related type of business. I know that there used to be a loophole where channels from abroad (different jurisdiction) did show commercials for kids, but I'm not sure if this is the case today.

Generally speaking, the law is quite clear: Ads specifically target towards children is illegal. Ads than are meant for grown ups, but is likely to be seen by children also has to adhere to certain limits.

I have to say I'm really happy with these laws. The same goes for the law that prohibits ads for alcohol containing beverages.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#406

Post by istjohn »

pevey wrote: post #368
tastysandwich wrote: post #46

I just don't see any alternatives to banning social media, perhaps even up to the age of 18. The dopaminergic effects are not dissimilar to drugs and social media is just as addictive. It's not clear how you could effectively regulate this stuff - especially in our highly polarised political climate. The right will immediately target "wokeness", and the left will immediately target "hate speech". And the kids will be…

The main goal of raising children, after keeping them alive, is teaching them the skills they need to survive and (hopefully) thrive in their world. These skills have changed over time and vary based on environment, society. Today, that means teaching kids how to cope with social media. It is in their world. It’s not going away. As a parent, I can understand the temptation to just want to ban it. I wish I could ban a…

Today that means teaching them how to cope with [nicotine | gambling | hand guns | fentanyl]. It is in their world. It is not going away. As a parent, I can understand the temptation to just want to ban it. I wish I could ban a lot of things I would rather my kids not have to deal with. But parenting just doesn’t work like that. They need to learn to deal with it, and it’s my job to try my best to help them do that.

Actually, we protect children from lots of things that they will need to confront as adults. My baby will need to learn how to safely navigate stairs eventually, but for now, the staircase is gated so she doesn't hurt herself before she's ready.

And as this comment explains[1], social media is hurting our children in real and profound ways.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35447798

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#407

Post by blitz_skull »

_heimdall wrote: post #403
tastysandwich wrote: post #46

I just don't see any alternatives to banning social media, perhaps even up to the age of 18. The dopaminergic effects are not dissimilar to drugs and social media is just as addictive. It's not clear how you could effectively regulate this stuff - especially in our highly polarised political climate. The right will immediately target "wokeness", and the left will immediately target "hate speech". And the kids will be…

If it's clear that social media is terrible for children (and I'd argue it's terrible for everyone), why can't we leave it up to parents to stop their kids from using it? I'm not sure how realistic it would be to enforce ban on social media under a certain age. The ban would have to be enforced on social media companies but they'd likely only be held to doing a best effort solution. They already set a minimum age at…

I mean that’s the status quo already. Parents who understand the inherent risks, probably already stop their children from using it.

Legislation would benefit children who were born to parents who do not understand the risks.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#408

Post by blitz_skull »

whatever1 wrote: post #232
tastysandwich wrote: post #46

I just don't see any alternatives to banning social media, perhaps even up to the age of 18. The dopaminergic effects are not dissimilar to drugs and social media is just as addictive. It's not clear how you could effectively regulate this stuff - especially in our highly polarised political climate. The right will immediately target "wokeness", and the left will immediately target "hate speech". And the kids will be…

Computer games are also addictive. Back in my days soccer and basketball were addictive as well. I vividly remember my grandpa despising my uncle for having obsession with playing soccer and not spending more time on his homework. It seems like a pattern, grown ups just don’t like the way youngsters are spending their time. Maybe it’s totally normal in your teens to just spend aimlessly time in seemingly useless thin…

Computer games certainly slot into this. Soccer and basketball do not.

Biologically there’s just no comparison to the dopamine bath your brain takes when using social media or video games.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#409

Post by _heimdall »

pevey wrote: post #368
tastysandwich wrote: post #46

I just don't see any alternatives to banning social media, perhaps even up to the age of 18. The dopaminergic effects are not dissimilar to drugs and social media is just as addictive. It's not clear how you could effectively regulate this stuff - especially in our highly polarised political climate. The right will immediately target "wokeness", and the left will immediately target "hate speech". And the kids will be…

The main goal of raising children, after keeping them alive, is teaching them the skills they need to survive and (hopefully) thrive in their world. These skills have changed over time and vary based on environment, society. Today, that means teaching kids how to cope with social media. It is in their world. It’s not going away. As a parent, I can understand the temptation to just want to ban it. I wish I could ban a…

Highly underrated opinion here!

Banning multi-billion dollar companies in a society dealing with regulatory capture, or help teach kids to deal with the world around them. One sure seems more easily attained than the other.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#410

Post by toxik »

rendall wrote: post #395

> " The case for banning children from social media " As a parent, I was looking forward to an article discussing reasons for banning children from social media. What are the philosophical implications? Mental health? Psychosocial? Rather, it seems the article begged that particular question and then discussed legal obstacles and consequences instead. Not the journalist's fault. Misleading headlines are the curse of…

An improved title:

Utah passes laws restricting children's access to social media: The implications and civil liberties concerns

Post reply on HN