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

731–740 of 783 posts

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

#731

Post by taxyz »

macintux wrote: post #629
taxyz wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is not that they NEVER existed, its that they no longer exist in the capacity most people mean when they use the term. As you mentioned, cities used to be organized around them. Most people now live in cities that are either don't have one at all or don't have one that is used in the way they were hundreds of years ago. Furthermore, the behavior that was tolerated in the town square would not be close to wha…

Requiring age verification online for adults is the only way to keep kids out. And requiring identification to lounge on the town square is generally considered unconstitutional in the U.S. I don’t know how to square this circle. Can you conduct age verification without requiring identification?

I think this again comes back to the idea of thinking of it as some sort of digital town square.

We don't seem to have an issue with the government requiring businesses to check ID for alcohol, tobacco, porn (in the physical world), and firearms. Movie theaters check ID for rated R movies if you appear to be under 17. In fact, a lot of online retailers of alcohol and tobacco now require ID to be verified at purchase instead of at delivery.

Facebook/Twitter/TikTok/etc are not the digital town square; the most charitable analogy for them is they they are merchants in the town square. And the rules should still apply to them.

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

#732

Post by willcipriano »

weakfish wrote: post #724
willcipriano wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 35 and I'm telling you that you didn't/don't do it as much as we did. From about 13 on we were trusted to just leave the house and go wherever we wanted on our bikes, little to no questions asked. City, rural, suburbs this was a pretty universal experience. One kid in the group might of had a early cell phone and that gave our parents more than enough peace of mind, but no location tracking and it would lose serv…

Oh I don’t disagree, I just meant that it’s a bit overkill to say they/we don’t hang out in person at all. I do have fond memories of running Halo 2 with my stepsister when I was 8-9, and those sort of nights seemed to get less common as we got smart phones. I am in a bit of a weird situation because I’m more independent than most (somewhat absent / workaholic family) but I know that’s the exception.

Take a look at the wealthier kids with stay at home moms. Zero privacy. She knows where you are and what you are doing at all times. Tracker in the phone, surveillance cameras at school and more often in the home, the school issued laptop logging every keystroke.

We had our own cash money. Parents wouldn't know specifics or "help you with budgeting". You earned it mowing lawns it was yours to spend. Getting a allowance on a credit card (in case he buys drugs!) isn't the same.

One last thing. Every night around 9 o'clock, the TV would ask parents all around the country "It's 9PM, do you know where your children are?" beacuse sometimes they would legitimately forget and not notice they haven't come home yet.

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

#733

Post by hnfong »

floxy wrote: post #370
RegBarclay wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll add my own anecdata here. My older kids are in their late 20s and one has bought a home and the other is buying a new build home this year. My youngest is 18, the greatest consumer of social media of my 4 children, and she's convinced she won't be able to buy a home like her under-30 siblings are doing right now. Sounds very much like a YMMV situation, but it feels like social media has influenced my youngest to…

If someone is convinced that all housing is going to stay/become extravagantly expensive, shouldn't they get into real estate development to cash in on the opportunity? So they can build houses/condos/etc. Seems like they could become architects, or real estate agents, or work for (or own) a construction company. Maybe designing robots that build houses. Or work for a REIT.

There’s a difference between being the owner of a construction business and being an employee. The business owner assumes the risks and upside if real estate is to become expensive, but the employees are mostly affected by supply and demand of other workers - I.e. even if there is high demand of workers in the real estate sector, if there’s a high supply of workers to satisfy the demand, there won’t be a big increase in salary for them.

That said, it does seem people generally are implicitly bullish on housing prices becoming more expensive over time. That’s how to interpret the fact that the first significant investment of many people's savings is a house.

If people held the contrary opinion (that real estate in general are going to deprecate in value) then the idea of buying a house may not be so ubiquitous .

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

#734

Post by philbin »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #726
willcipriano wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 35 and I'm telling you that you didn't/don't do it as much as we did. From about 13 on we were trusted to just leave the house and go wherever we wanted on our bikes, little to no questions asked. City, rural, suburbs this was a pretty universal experience. One kid in the group might of had a early cell phone and that gave our parents more than enough peace of mind, but no location tracking and it would lose serv…

This whole thread is a bunch of boomers or gen X folks who are upset at the techno freedom that the youth have. These same boomers and Gen X are then advocating for taking away freedom of internet association. Then you come here and write out a post explaining how the kids of today are living in a relative prison and back in the day you got all this freedom to go on dates at the mall that your parents wouldn’t approv…

[dead]

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

#735

Post by c22 »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #729
weakfish wrote: post #727

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that calling it prison is over the top, but I also think your response is a bit rude and dismissive of very valid statements by the reply

Good. Rude opinions deserve even ruder retorts. Every time a thread like this comes up, I’m reminded that the average HN user fantasizes about licking boots, and that those who do not enjoy bootlicking are treated as pariahs. Boomers trying to mass enforce parental controls via legislation is so bad for freedoms I don’t know where to begin. I wish I could do more than simply “be rude”. There is still not a way to pun…

No. A downward spiral of ruder and ruder retorts is what we are trying to avoid here.

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

#736

Post by maximinus_thrax »

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #650
maximinus_thrax wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that the case here? What is that large group and what is it comprised of? Does it represent all Floridians?

Of course it doesn't represent all mindsets. That's what elections are for. All Floridians participate in the vote to elect a desired philosophy into power and then the winning party hopes that philosophy will reflect in the laws and policies created in the near future. You elect a like minded leader to act on your interests so you don't have to micro manage the governance of a state. The alternative could be to have…

I am well aware of how direct democracy vs representative democracy works, so I don't need you to educate me on the subject. My issue with your comment is that you assume that a large group of people agree with the law as if we're talking about direct democracy, which I believe is not true. I do not believe that a large number of Floridians (large enough to matter in terms of voting, I'm not saying large as in city-large) agree with requiring an ID to access social media. The same thing happened with reproductive rights. As it turns out, an even larger group of republicans don't really agree with banning abortion, although their representatives think otherwise.

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

#737

Post by gretch »

autoexec wrote: post #684
gretch wrote: post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

History is full of governments overthrown by a dissenting populace. The US itself broke out of the British empire when they didn’t like the government anymore. If they do something egregious, then people revolt.

> If they do something egregious, then people revolt. Do you mean something egregious like the mass surveillance of the population, or the mass incarceration of citizens, or widespread theft via civil asset forfeiture, or executions by police, or human experimentation on Americans, or dropping bombs on citizens in US cities, or the military shooting protesting college kids, or lying about weapons of mass destruction…

The life of the average american citizen is still really good, even though the rights of some minority populations have been violated.

If we look at the quality of life for american citizens compared to other the quality of life of other nations right before revolution (famously french, russian, chinese), we are not close.

So maybe it's not a good idea to burn it down and start over just yet.

> The threat of a successful revolt is basically zero

That's what they all say. But the US lost the war in vietnam and afghanistan to natives with extremely low tech weapons.

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

#738

Post by hnfong »

rhelz wrote: post #499
ericmcer wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are really ignoring that I put smart before hard. Sorry things haven't gone your way though, I am kinda surprised someone could have been in tech for > 10 years and not have significant savings, stock, real estate or something built up.

> You are really ignoring that I put smart before hard. chuckle . Well, I'm sure that will cheer up the kiddies: "I guess you just don't deserve a house, because you aren't smart enough." > I am kinda surprised someone could have been in tech for > 10 years and not have significant savings, That'll cheer up the kiddies too :-) "Wow, what's wrong with you; I can't believe you don't have anything to show for your 4 yea…

I couldn’t agree more.

The idea that “working hard and smart leads to success” is “toxic” in so. Any ways one of which you’ve explained. The other is how it leads successful people to (often falsely) believe that their success is mainly attributable to their hard work and intellect, and assume moral superiority over other less successful people.

Somehow it eludes people that while “hard” work and “being smart” is generally a virtue, there’s often situations in life where one can’t consciously control the outcome.

Instead of (implicitly?) measuring the virtue (or even “worth”) of people by how successful they are, perhaps society as a whole should start recognizing that most people probably already gave their best regardless of eventual outcome, and while some might be more “lucky” than others by some metrics, in the end we are all human beings and everyone deserves the same level of respect.

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

#739

Post by tristan957 »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #459
tristan957 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What are the positive effects of blocking Pornhub?

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

#740

Post by SirMaster »

willcipriano wrote: post #719
weakfish wrote: post #715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, as a “youth” (23) who wasn’t so long ago in high school, people still hang out plenty. They just document it more (for better or for worse. I suspect worse.)

I'm 35 and I'm telling you that you didn't/don't do it as much as we did. From about 13 on we were trusted to just leave the house and go wherever we wanted on our bikes, little to no questions asked. City, rural, suburbs this was a pretty universal experience. One kid in the group might of had a early cell phone and that gave our parents more than enough peace of mind, but no location tracking and it would lose serv…

It's very rare today, but some kids in some places really still do go out that much on their own.
Post reply on HN