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

471–480 of 783 posts

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

#471

Post by vkou »

maximinus_thrax wrote: post #438
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 Just like Oregon’s now-repealed drug use decriminalization bill.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.

> 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…

> But DeSantis will win some more heart and minds of the folks who secretly do want big government protecting them from the boogieman.

Those supporters aren't very secret about it. In fact, they are quite open about it.

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

#472

Post by vkou »

handoflixue wrote: post #443
antegamisou wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Policy-making isn't supposed be, at least shouldn't be, some lab experiment. The hey at least we tried isn't the best reasoning for the lack of insight of those in charge.

How else are we going to find out which policies work, if we can't perform experiments? The experiment is the basic tool of science.

Some experiments can't be performed, for ethical reasons.

We don't test if parachutes work by throwing people not wearing them out of planes, for one.

States can experiment with variability in their legislature, but there is a unified federal law that guarantees certain fundamental rights. Much of the south is currently trampling all over them.

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

#473

Post by ricardobeat »

tmaly wrote: post #114
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…

I know there is this big push to limit screen time for kids. I give screen time more as a reward for hard work and getting chores done. I use the screen time feature on Apple devices to limit my kids screen time and the type of apps they can access.

It doesn’t work though. Using instagram web bypasses the app limit. If you set a website limit, it only applies to Safari. If you block TikTok, they will find video compilations in Spotify, which shouldn’t have to be blocked. It’s a mess.

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

#474

Post by gopher_space »

scarface_74 wrote: post #393
gopher_space wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kids-only internet (moderated by child development phds, idk) you need specific, cheap hardware to access. Less walled garden, more sandbox. It wouldn't be a place for entrepreneurs. Registration and access maintained at the county level or smaller so that community standards and relationships shape adoption and use. Low age cutoff with actual adults trying to connect put in jail and on a list.

I’m struggling to parse anything you said.

I'm arguing for a completely separate kindernet. While on packed public transportation.

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

#475

Post by mrkstu »

caditinpiscinam wrote: post #420
gnicholas wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Justice Brandeis, who coined the term "laboratories of democracy", felt otherwise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laboratories_of_democracy

I wonder what the people who were forcibly sterilized after Buck v Bell thought of Brandeis' philosophy.

[flagged]

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

#476

Post by ricardobeat »

yrds96 wrote: post #375
justaman wrote: post #4

I grew up as social media came into being(mid 2000s). When I was 13, I got Myspace. When I was 16, I got Facebook. It wasn't until well into college that I realized the impact social media had on my mental health. I would go further and say nobody until 18 should have social media, but that may be unrealistic in 2024.

I grew up with the birth of the internet and social media and I have the opposite feeling. I know that sound the old one monologue but I came from the time that social media were exclusively social and not a bunch of people creating content endlessly in the hope of making tons of money in the internet. I used aol, Microsoft Messenger, Facebook and a very famous Google social media on my country, called Orkut. None of…

I understand where you’re coming from but these were not social media.

I used Orkut too. It was a place to talk to your real-life friends, join local communities and organize events. You didn’t develop a personal following or post selfies looking for approval.

Social media, as we have it today, allows individuals to broadcast their twisted mind to millions, and not via text - only cute pictures, memes, and 30-second clips. These are worlds apart.

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

#477

Post by LVB »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #434
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.

> Let the experiment take place, I say It is an unconstitutional law; it is following the path of similar unconstitutional laws¹²³. Where is the experiment? ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchan... ² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reno_v._American_Civil_Liberti... (sections about minor access to indecent material struck down) ³ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/ohio/oh...

These rulings are 13 and 27 years old (the third is in progress), so I'd argue that revisiting the legal analysis of the laws and precedents is useful here in itself.

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

#478

Post by wvenable »

Brybry wrote: post #470
wvenable wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Parental control software picks up on that. [1] That's client side. This law specifically makes this a server-side issue; the service cannot let a minor make an account. How do you do that without ID?

By not having this law and doing it client side. My opinion is the law is bad.

This law might have never come up if we had better parental controls at every level of the software and hardware stack.

I'm a parent I have parent controls setup on my child's devices but it's very hard to dial it in properly and cover all the bases. It should be far more straight forward to manage than it is now.

I'm obviously pretty tech savvy and I would say 99% of parents are not going to get this right.

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

#479

Post by ok_dad »

ricardobeat wrote: post #446
wvenable wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might feel that way but what's the real difference between TikTok and watching TV? Society has always restricted children's access to specific content but now we're restricting children's access to specific mediums regardless of the content itself. Why is TikTok or YouTube shorts not a valid way to consume media? It's a bit like arguing graphic novels are acceptable to children but short comics are not.

The difference is massive . Your weird neighbour who has a feet fetish would never get to be a TV star, but he can amass 50k followers on TikTok, and request feet pics via private messages to them. Including underage children. Now multiply that by ten thousand. TV, by nature of being a group effort and holding a sliver of a monopoly for your attention, had a natural content filter (based on societal standards, for ba…

> Your weird neighbour who has a feet fetish would never get to be a TV star

Look up Nickelodeon and Dan Schneider my man.

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

#480

Post by Beldin »

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.

That assumes (at the very least) that any data gathered from such an "experiment" would be representative of what the effects of such legislation would be elsewhere.

Perhaps... but my guess is that repeatability wouldn't depend on the children but on the wants and needs of the governing politicians.

That is, the data would, in my view, likely be worthless for its purported goal, but can give some insight into some political shenanigans.

Post reply on HN