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

Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

afterbabel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#281

Post by maxioatic »

thegrim000 wrote: post #212
rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

It's funny .. earlier today there was a front page HN post about the federal government mandating safer circular saws. It seemed like the majority of users in the thread were in favor of the federal government mandating technology changes to prevent harm from being done to the population. Now for this issue, there's harm being done to children, and the majority of users in the thread seem to be against government int…

It was about table saws, not circular saws. There’s a big difference between the two. Table saw accidents often result in losing fingers and it’s not that difficult to mess up while using one.

There’s a well known, proven, easy solution to table saw accidents called SawStop. It’s basically as obvious to use as a seat belt is if you want to be safe. The only problem is those table saws are very expensive.

Social media doesn’t have an existing and obvious solution (besides not using it).

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#282

Post by Biologist123 »

rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

> You may not like FB, IG, TikTok, etc.. I certainly don't care for any of these products. But these are communications platforms. Restricting the right to free speech does have negative consequences

You’re conflating these tech platforms with freedom of speech. It might be helpful to the debate to separate out the addictive algorithm and user base from people’s right to think and speak freely.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#283

Post by unclebucknasty »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #268
epolanski wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the point you're trying to make. I for one deleted all of those platforms and my life is definitely better (I'm way less distracted for once, but the list is longer). What do I care what others do?

The commenter is arguing from a broad "what's good for society" sense, not on strict individuality. While I disagree with the whole idea of legislating access to social media/internet services in any way (RIP anonymity), I do think there can be valid places and times for regulation that seeks to change society itself, not just individuals.

>RIP anonymity

Maybe anonymity has had a good run and is actually at the root of the issue in many contexts. After all, people don't (generally) walk around IRL wearing ski masks so they can say crazy shit or troll people without consequence. And we also get the courtesy of knowing who the people we're talking to actually are.

And if you say, "yeah but doxxing and death threats" or "my employer might fire me", etc then maybe these are the actual problems that need to be addressed.

And, yes, I realize that's coming from someone who's IRL neither Uncle Buck or Buc Nasty, as his handle might imply. But, obviously that's where we currently are, which is the point.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#284

Post by TacticalCoder »

rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

All you wrote doesn't address the elephant in the room: that social media is responsible for an epidemy of teen mental illness (which may or may not be true).

If that's true, the suggested measures: no phone before high-school, no social media before 16, phone-free schools, ... do not seem crazy.

Kids cannot drink, cannot smoke, cannot have sex with adults, cannot buy firearms, etc.

There's a shitload of things kids cannot do: is it really an attack on free speech to have kids not have phones at school and wait until 16 before they can use these mediocre piece of shit social media platforms?

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#285

Post by throwaway2037 »

Ekaros wrote: post #226
ImPleadThe5th wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While both paternalism. Requiring safety features on a saw does not restrict free speech. It's more akin to seatbelt laws. It's also made to protect everyone who uses a table saw and not just children. Imo, I do think social media needs to be reeled in by policy. But I can see why it makes people uncomfortable and why there is a difference with the saw.

I wonder how many would be for seatbelt laws if the addition of seatbelts say doubled the price of car.

    > if the addition of seatbelts say doubled the price of car
Here is the problem: They didn't. So what is your point?

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#286

Post by boxed »

kevingadd wrote: post #253
steeve wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could make that exact argument of cigarettes too. And see why it doesn't work in the real world.

Cigarettes aren't speech. I don't understand why anyone would argue otherwise.

No, but there the issue is bodily autonomy. Which arguably is much more important a right than free speech.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#287

Post by boxed »

miki123211 wrote: post #95

This author is seriously suggesting that governments ban children's use of social media, and that can't really be done without completely destroying internet anonymity. Any policy that actually achieved this, without being trivial to circumvent, would basically need to replicate the great firewall of China. Doing this in a half-assed way is even worse than not doing anything at all. If you just require ID checks for…

> This author is seriously suggesting that governments ban children's use of social media

Where did it do that?

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#288

Post by lynx23 »

hgomersall wrote: post #260
lynx23 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it is the parents responsibility to set boundaries for their children. It can be complicated at times, granted. But that doesn't make it less of their job. Heck, I got my first CD player with 14. Yes, I felt left out at school, but... guess what, I didn't die. Children need to learn that there are rules, and someone else dictates them. Throwing tantrums is a typical reaction that needs to be weeded out as a p…

As is pointed out in the article, a huge factor is the collective action trap. An individual set of parents can do very little to deal with mental health if they are the only ones.

I totally doubt this is true. Its a nice excuse though.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#289

Post by mxkopy »

Biologist123 wrote: post #282
rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

> You may not like FB, IG, TikTok, etc.. I certainly don't care for any of these products. But these are communications platforms. Restricting the right to free speech does have negative consequences You’re conflating these tech platforms with freedom of speech. It might be helpful to the debate to separate out the addictive algorithm and user base from people’s right to think and speak freely.

As always the real takeaway is to repeal Citizen’s United

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#290

Post by throwaway2037 »

steeve wrote: post #207
rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

One could make that exact argument of cigarettes too. And see why it doesn't work in the real world.

Are you making the argument that restricting cigarette sales by age does not work?
Post reply on HN