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

Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 783 posts

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#451

Post by somethoughts »

jiayo wrote: post #202
oliwarner wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

H.B.3 only prohibits these minors holding accounts on social media. They can still browse, as can anyone without an account and age verification. You'd be able to view a business's information, watch videos, etc etc etc, just not create your own. It also has conditions for which sites are affected by this law. The site has to have doomscroll and already be popular with kids. Google Maps isn't what they're targeting.…

How many social media sites allow you to do anything without an account? Twitter used to be wide open but X competely locked down. Instagram lets you click 2 things and then the paywall pops up. I'm not sure about Facebook but it isn't much better.

A plus of this law would be if this would force social media sites to stop locking down read access behind a sign up wall.

I think the barrier to entry with creating a new account on each site right now is low when no ID is required - so social media sites lock everything down.

With the new friction of requiring ID, it could be harder to get users to create accounts so locking down everything won't make sense from a viewership access perspective.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#452

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

rstuart4133 wrote: post #404
oliwarner wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

H.B.3 only prohibits these minors holding accounts on social media. They can still browse, as can anyone without an account and age verification. You'd be able to view a business's information, watch videos, etc etc etc, just not create your own. It also has conditions for which sites are affected by this law. The site has to have doomscroll and already be popular with kids. Google Maps isn't what they're targeting.…

> I'm in no rush to show Zuck my passport I agree, but I think your problem isn't Zuck, it's with passports. Government issued licences aren't fit for purpose any more. They were when all you did with your paper drivers licence is show it to the police, but now they've become a form of ID you show man+dog who gets to scrape a whole pile of into from it that can be used to track you. For example, they can follow your…

> don't identify you in any way

That's a critical flaw to those in power.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#453

Post by smileysteve »

reacharavindh wrote: post #58
aurareturn wrote: post #25

>Critics have said the bill violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protections for free speech and that parents, not the government, should make decisions about the online presence of their children of all ages. It's extremely difficult for parents to stop their children, especially early teens from using social media. This law should make it easier and it would put the work on Meta, Snap, Tiktok, Pinterest…

Not speaking from personal experience. My kid is only 4. Your argument seems like exactly what my parents would have said about me spending so much time on TV, computers and electronics instead of studying, playing outside, sports etc. Almost exactly like your last paragraph.. “I’m personally glad that I grew up without infinite channels on TV, computers and its games, cell phones and your SMSes. I’m worried about yo…

Lol at the infinite channels on TV part really highlighting.

As an adult, I don't have cable, I use an antenna. Yes, I have streaming some streaming services.

As adults and/or parents we can make decisions that help our kids (and they might help us too)

I also use Adblock.

The TV argument is the same as devices too; We had one family TV growing up; I still refuse to have a TV in my bedroom.

In conclusion, seems like we've hit the generation where our parents used TV to parent and so now we don't know how to parents -- or, for many people, be.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#454

Post by singleshot_ »

Clubber wrote: post #445
singleshot_ wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is related. One poster suggested that the online platforms (which are, for a number of reasons previously noted, not town squares) are actually more like shopping malls. Another post noted that shopping malls (in California) can be subject to requirements to allow someone else’s speech in their area of commerce. But online platforms are not like shopping malls, because online platforms sell advertiser access to a…

>But online platforms are not like shopping malls, because online platforms sell advertiser access to a coherent speech product, which is distinct from the sale of goods in ways that profoundly affect first amendment protection of their business. But the social media companies aren't the ones who want age verification and to kick people off their platforms, the government is. The companies want kids in their audience…

This discussion has gotten a bit convoluted. I apologize for not being clear. Original idea was that the government can’t kick every kid off social media because social media is the public square and kicking people out of the public square is wrong.

The reason why this argument is bad is that online social media platforms aren’t the public square. They’re not the public square because they are something else: a coherent speech product.

They are allowed to kick people off because they produce a coherent speech product.

But you are right, the fact that they are allowed to kick people off is not directly related to the fact the government wants to bar kids from using these sites.

Are you and I in full agreement now? I think we might be.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#455

Post by MisterBastahrd »

alphabettsy wrote: post #81

The biggest problem I see is that we’re now essentially requiring ID to use substantial parts of the internet. So many business only have a Facebook page, Google maps has social features. I already didn’t want a Facebook account just to see a businesses specials, now I’ll need to present ID too? Certainly interested to see how all this plays out.

All of this pretending to be concerned about children is really about doxxing and creating lists of political undesirables.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#456

Post by ricardobeat »

reacharavindh wrote: post #58
aurareturn wrote: post #25

>Critics have said the bill violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protections for free speech and that parents, not the government, should make decisions about the online presence of their children of all ages. It's extremely difficult for parents to stop their children, especially early teens from using social media. This law should make it easier and it would put the work on Meta, Snap, Tiktok, Pinterest…

Not speaking from personal experience. My kid is only 4. Your argument seems like exactly what my parents would have said about me spending so much time on TV, computers and electronics instead of studying, playing outside, sports etc. Almost exactly like your last paragraph.. “I’m personally glad that I grew up without infinite channels on TV, computers and its games, cell phones and your SMSes. I’m worried about yo…

Did you get exposed to far right propaganda, dehumanizing women, incitations of violence, practical suggestions of suicide, cartoons about rape followed by pregnancy and a miscarriage, or similar content on TV when you were a kid?

This is the kind of shit that’s everywhere on YT now, and your kids will stumble upon (father of one here). The “faces of death” stuff we had access to once in a blue moon is not even close.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#457

Post by munk-a »

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #444
maximinus_thrax wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let the experiment take place, I say. I think the experiment is more about the judiciary and about tribal politics. There's ample case law against something like this, so to me this seems unconstitutional, and I doubt it will stand. But DeSantis will win some more heart and minds of the folks who secretly do want big government protecting them from the boogieman. Regardless of anyone's views about social media, the…

Laws are often just social signals in writing. A law indicates that a large group agrees that something is bad. Often times people find it easier to just agree with a law rather than navigate the mental gray area around behaviors that aren't black and white.

That understanding really breaks down when partisan politics are involved - if it's us vs. them you can do a lot of stuff without your base raising a stink as long as it's posed as being against your opposition.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#458

Post by smileysteve »

aurareturn wrote: post #74
reacharavindh wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not speaking from personal experience. My kid is only 4. Your argument seems like exactly what my parents would have said about me spending so much time on TV, computers and electronics instead of studying, playing outside, sports etc. Almost exactly like your last paragraph.. “I’m personally glad that I grew up without infinite channels on TV, computers and its games, cell phones and your SMSes. I’m worried about yo…

I think there are magnitudes and cliffs for this stuff. TV --> has quality control, professionally done, goes through a team of editors/creators before making it onto the screen Early internet --> Mostly harmless content, can find dark stuff if kids look for it but it's pretty hard to find. More dangerous than TV but not too bad. SMS --> just chatting with people you know. Not afraid. TikTok, IG Reels, Youtube Shorts…

Your look back fails at VHS tapes or home video though.

It also fails at abusive or addicted family members.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#459

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

tristan957 wrote: post #287
oliwarner wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is not what anyone is calling for.

Pornhub just blocked Texas. We are very much using children as an excuse for big government.

Big government forced licensure upon motor vehicle operators because early on they demonstrated a tendency to cause societal harm. There is a place where libertarian ideals have to be curtailed for the greater good.

Re: Florida's DeSantis signs law restricting social media for people under 16

#460

Post by jorvi »

LVB wrote: post #360

Let the experiment take place, I say. Just like Oregon’s now-repealed drug use decriminalization bill. It didn’t achieve its intended goals, but there is now a mass of data about what assumptions were wrong, implementation issues, etc. IMO there is real value in letting states put such changes into play to get beyond the debate and actually test the hypotheses.

The problem is that once such a thing fails, it gives massive ammunition to future naysayers that get to conveniently ignore all the implementation failures because campaigning for/against will ultimately boil down to bullet points.
Post reply on HN