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

Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

abcnews.go.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 720 posts

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#411

Post by runsWphotons »

wonderwonder wrote: post #189
causal wrote: post #36

I might be the only one here in favor of this, and wanting to see a federal rollout. It is not reasonable to expect parents to spontaneously agree on a strategy for keeping kids off social media- and that kind of coordination is what it would take, because the kids + social media companies have more than enough time to coordinate workarounds. Have the law put the social media companies on the parents side, or these k…

I find myself agreeing with this. Me 15 years ago would have raged at this. I have kids now and they are pressured to join all sorts of social media platforms. I still don't allow them to have it but I know they take a slight social hit for it. There is zero positive to giving kids the ability to access social media sites designed to be addictive when they don't have the mental facilities to determine real from not r…

The internet is just as real as anything else. Out of touch.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#412

Post by tootie »

causal wrote: post #36

I might be the only one here in favor of this, and wanting to see a federal rollout. It is not reasonable to expect parents to spontaneously agree on a strategy for keeping kids off social media- and that kind of coordination is what it would take, because the kids + social media companies have more than enough time to coordinate workarounds. Have the law put the social media companies on the parents side, or these k…

I have two teens and have yet to see the negative effects of social media for them or any of their peers. Not to say it doesn't exist, but I sincerely doubt it's as awful as the doomsayers think. My personal observation of being raised in he 80s is that kids were far more awful to each other then than now.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#413

Post by TillE »

o11c wrote: post #335
paulddraper wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) The First Amendment guarantees free expression, not anonymous expression. For example, there are federal requirements for identification for political messages. [1] These requirements do not violate the First Amendment. [1] https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/advertisi...

In particular, "anonymous speech is required if you want to have free speech" is actually a very niche position, not a mainstream one. It just happens to be widely spammed in certain online cultures.

America has a very long tradition of anonymity being part of free speech, going back to the Federalist Papers. This is not some new online issue.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#414

Post by TillE »

paulddraper wrote: post #346
o11c wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In particular, "anonymous speech is required if you want to have free speech" is actually a very niche position, not a mainstream one. It just happens to be widely spammed in certain online cultures.

Correct. I am staunch believer in the moral and societal good of free speech. Anonymous speech is far more dubious. Like, protests seem valuable. Protests while wearing robes and masks however...

> Protests while wearing robes and masks however

This is absolutely permitted in America. It is illegal in countries like Germany which have no strong free speech protections.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#415

Post by spogbiper »

lukev wrote: post #210
causal wrote: post #36

I might be the only one here in favor of this, and wanting to see a federal rollout. It is not reasonable to expect parents to spontaneously agree on a strategy for keeping kids off social media- and that kind of coordination is what it would take, because the kids + social media companies have more than enough time to coordinate workarounds. Have the law put the social media companies on the parents side, or these k…

But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff, but that any of these laws will either be (a) unenforceable and useless, or (b) draconian and…

I propose the Leisure Suit Larry method. Just make users answer some outdated trivia questions that only olds will know when they sign up for an account.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#416

Post by belval »

qwertox wrote: post #355
Kye wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have zero qualms about being absolute ghouls under their wallet names. The people with the most power in society don't need anonymity. The people with the least often can't safely express themselves without it. Also: https://theconversation.com/online-anonymity-study-found-sta... >> "What matters, it seems, is not so much whether you are commenting anonymously, but whether you are invested in your persona and…

There are two points which matter: - No more bots or fake propaganda accounts. - Illegal content, such as insults or the like, will not get published. And if it does, it will have direct consequences. I'm also not tending towards a requirement to have all social networks ID'd, but I think that a Twitter alternative which enables a more serious discussion should exist. A place where politicians and journalists or just…

The thing is, the political climate is very toxic and the absence of anonymity can have a real impact for things that are basically wrong think.

Say for example I held the opinion that immigration threshold should be lower. No matter how many non-xenophobic justifications I can put on that opinion, my possibly on H1B colleagues can and would look up my opinion on your version of Twitter and it would have a real impact on my work life.

There is a reason why we hold voting in private, it's because when boiled down to its roots, there are principles that guide your opinions they are usually non -reconciliable with someone else's opinion and we preserve harmony by keeping everyone ignorant of their colleagues political opinions. It's not a bad system, but it's one that requires anonymity

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#418

Post by swozey »

I wonder what this would affect culturally. There is a LOT more to this that will happen than just keeping children off of social media.

The USA exports its culture/pop/etc all over the world. I don't follow teenager arts/music/etc sources but a lot of musicians start in middle school and have so many mix tapes online and get known around their cities from using social media. Artists find other artists, learn other styles, etc.

I got into programming through IRC as a kid, which maybe that's like tiktok nowadays, I don't know a good comparison. I learned so much through sites/apps I could "upload content" and "tracks user activity."

So, what happens when every kid-teenager in a nation thats the worlds biggest culture exporter isn't getting their culture out?

I can't believe this got 106 to 13 with the "Regardless of parental approval."

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#419

Post by DylanDmitri »

qwertox wrote: post #355
Kye wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have zero qualms about being absolute ghouls under their wallet names. The people with the most power in society don't need anonymity. The people with the least often can't safely express themselves without it. Also: https://theconversation.com/online-anonymity-study-found-sta... >> "What matters, it seems, is not so much whether you are commenting anonymously, but whether you are invested in your persona and…

There are two points which matter: - No more bots or fake propaganda accounts. - Illegal content, such as insults or the like, will not get published. And if it does, it will have direct consequences. I'm also not tending towards a requirement to have all social networks ID'd, but I think that a Twitter alternative which enables a more serious discussion should exist. A place where politicians and journalists or just…

Or, to post on a political forum you must have an ID. You can have and post from multiple accounts, but your id and all associated accounts can be penalized for bad behavior.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#420

Post by satellite2 »

jlokier wrote: post #249
lukev wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff, but that any of these laws will either be (a) unenforceable and useless, or (b) draconian and…

> But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet That seems intuitive, but it's not actually true. I suggest looking up zero-knowledge proofs. Using modern cryptography, it is easy to send a machine-generated proof to your social media provider that your government-provided ID says your age is ≥ 16, without revealing anything else about…

I'm not a cryptographer so I might miss something but I have the impression that

- either a stolen card can be reused thousands of time meaning that it's so easy to get a fake that it's not worth the implementation cost

- either there is away to uniquely identify a card and then it becomes another identifier like tracking ids.

Post reply on HN