The case for banning children from social media • Hacker News Board

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#581

Post by bsenftner » Thu, Apr 06, 2023, 12:19 PM UTC

eimrine wrote: post #497

bsenftner wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How's about we start testing for maturity, and despite a person being 45 years of age, their maturity tests to be 12 years of age, so no social media for them. That would actually be significantly better for everyone involved. But who can trust anyone with a "maturity test" and then who can be trusted to administer said test honestly? Perhaps our entire society is immature and nobody deserves social media?

Who will test a maturity of maturity test developers? They will be kind of a shaping factor for a society.

My point was that such a test is impossible.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#582

Post by blitz_skull » Thu, Apr 06, 2023, 1:55 PM UTC

_heimdall wrote: post #417

blitz_skull wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If parents are okay with their kids using social media, I'm not sure that I should have the right to tell them otherwise. How would a ban even work though, without ultimately depending on parent intervention? Companies could throw up a "are you over 18?" banner, but those don't work. They could go full KYC and require users to provide government issued IDs, but that feels like a drastic step away from privacy and dat…

I'm not saying there's a clear path forward. And to be honest, I'm not even really advocating for a government ban. The cynic in me says, "Hey if I raise my kid better, it's just an opportunity for them to be better prepared than someone else's kid." (i.e. Less competition)

But the optimist in me says once a kid grows up, there's a ton of "past wrongs" that they can choose to right, given they have the proper self awareness.

There's also a chance I'm just flat-out wrong, but... I'm betting my child's future that I'm not.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#583

Post by moi2388 » Thu, Apr 06, 2023, 3:20 PM UTC

I have an idea: parenting. I never had issues with social media, nor did any of my friends, because we had parents who talked to us, limited our online time and showed alternatives.

Why should we ban something because parents are too lazy to do their job?

Having said that; we should immediately ban all ads without opt-in, and the same for cookies and the like.

Doing things without consent is not okay.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#584

Post by msla » Thu, Apr 06, 2023, 5:38 PM UTC

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…

Banning everyone from social media is not possible, especially not based on whatever pseudoscience you're pretending to know about this week.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#585

Post by flerovium » Thu, Apr 06, 2023, 10:48 PM UTC

Hizonner wrote: post #88

People keep suggesting stuff like that as though it were somehow easy to know who was a child. It isn't. Not if you want to serve the whole world, or even very much of the world. And not if you don't want to create a panopticon where everything anybody does is associated with everything else that person does, and nothing is ever, ever anonymous. There are a bunch of sleazy "age verification" companies out there claim…

A company needs to make a reasonable effort. If something is as popular as TikTok, and people know there are lots of children on the app, then the company is liable.

GNU Taler figured out a way to verify age without revealing your identity.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#586

Post by flerovium » Thu, Apr 06, 2023, 10:50 PM UTC

armchairhacker wrote: post #49

I don't necessarily think it's an ethically bad idea, but "banning all children from all social media" is simply impractical for many reasons, including: - You essentially have to check some sort of ID and ban VPNs, banning online privacy which is BAD - The smartest kids are way more tech-savvy than the dumbest adults, so you may end up banning adults too, which is BAD - What will you do to children who get caught? J…

GNU Taler figured out a way to verify age without revealing ID.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#587

Post by omikun » Fri, Apr 07, 2023, 6:17 PM UTC

randomdata wrote: post #482

dustedcodes wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's make Heroin, prostitution and assault rifles legal to under age kids, because after all if you are a good parent then you can be sure that your child will certainly not get access to those things via their friends or other avenues. Why have rules, laws or bans (just a form of law) for anything anywhere. All evil things in this world are just a matter of parenting. Gosh, you're so fecking clever how come nobody…

Indeed, social interaction is, generally, addictive. But if you ban the kids from HN they aren't apt to give up social interaction cold turkey, they'll go interact with the neighbours instead to get their fix. Is that actually a win? Emotionally, I can see why some hang onto the idea of talking face to face just like in the good old days, but at the same time you are trading for greatly reduced access to the world's…

Social interaction is addictive in the way food is addictive. A lot of the draw of social media/games/drugs is an attempt to fill the hole left by a lack of social interaction. Indeed, take away social media and people will hang out more often. I would argue that's exactly what we want as a society. Less social interaction mediated by big corporations is a win.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#588

Post by vincnetas » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 10:02 AM UTC

ok_dad wrote: post #362

sssilver wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just realized that banning blatant advertisement may be one of the most effective measures to help slow down the reckless consumption of natural resources

Imagine if people didn't think they needed 27 hilarious t-shirts they'll never wear or wear once, a tool to cut an apple into slices (plus one for all the other fruits and veg), plastic bags for everything they pack for their kids, toys that will go on the pile of other toys, a new phone and car each year, 137 pairs of sneakers, etc. Not to mention no longer getting ear-and-eye-fucked with billboards, pop-ups, requir…

you had me on your side, but then you came for a tool to cut apples and now you have mortal enemy. i will defend a right to ikea apple cutter with all my might and will soread the word about it as far as possible.

no, really. its a very convenient and often used tool in my home.

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#589

Post by nextlevelwizard » Sat, Apr 08, 2023, 1:52 PM UTC

hooverd wrote: post #446

nextlevelwizard wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Require by law that everyone on social media authenticates their age (maybe also their names, this would be good way to get rid of bots as well). This can be done with government ID or with via your bank or even with requiring social security number when creating an account. Or government can just make a new digital ID system that you have to go and register at whatever place is suitable for this and you can use that…

I think anonymous users might call you a slur, but the worst harassment I've seen online has come from people who proudly show their names and faces.

If there was central way to tie together online identities you could ignore/mute them from all platforms at once

Re: The case for banning children from social media

#590

Post by cabalamat » Sun, Apr 09, 2023, 12:17 PM UTC

arbitrage wrote: post #444

cabalamat wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 totally forgotten about. A good start would be to ban feeds based on algorithms; instead your feed would be a chronological list of new posts from channels you've chosen to follow.

> A good start would be to ban feeds based on algorithms; instead your feed would be a chronological list of new posts from channels you've chosen to follow. The replacement you've described for an algorithm is still an algorithm.

Stop being pedantic; you know what I mean.