Live data from Hacker News

Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

reuters.com

491–500 of 580 posts

Re: Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

#491

Adding some context which is sorely missing: Our government intends to spruik this at the UN and get other countries on board. Our government has said there will always be a non id method Youtube will still be accessible it is just the account making/usership which will be banned Posting my threaded comment higher up: I'm an australian who completed the esafety survey which helped guide this policy. I pushed for anon…

> Youtube will still be accessible it is just the account making/usership which will be banned Then what difference will it make in practice? Do the legislators really think that kids being able to comment on videos was the most harmful thing about the platform? YouTube will still be able to give you suggestions and send you down a rabbit hole of smoothbrain content even if you use it without an account. > I support…

It has some signal value, but it's also a part of creating a culture where social media isn't mandatory in the greater society and the workforce- which has a lot of benefits- and not exposing the next generation to the crushing double demoralisation of AI/Machine learning and social media hyperconnectivity which no generation has had before and could ruin them imo.

I do believe in this so ask whatever tricky questions you want.

Re: Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

#492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We should be allowed to create and use whatever UI we want for the public endpoints that are exposed Having been at a company that tried this: The number of poorly-behaved or outright abusive clients is a huge problem. Having a client become popular with a small group of people and then receive some update that turned it into a DDoS machine because someone made a mistake in a loop or forgot to sleep after an error…

You've described the problems. But this is where all the value of the future is locked up. We can't do better at serving people's individual needs until we give up on "one size MUST FIT ALL"

Also Google raked in about 100 bil based on a quick search last year.

Surely some of that could be redirected to an engineering team to do what's listed here, and while they're at it, maybe make the Apple TV YouTube app not suck industrial quantities of ass.

I think the only one I've used that's worse than YouTube's is Nebula but it's not a direct comparison, Nebula just lags quite a bit, it does function. The YouTube app in comparison frequently just... breaks in incredibly bizarre ways.

Re: Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

#493
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple answer to these situations is usually that it's not the same people complaining in both instances. I see similar things in places with anonymous posting where people assume everyone was in agreement on x, then later they hear something different and try to frame it like a flip-flop or a gotcha. People are never all in agreement. To add to that, often no news is good news, or rather people won't bother post…

>it's not the same people complaining in both instances I just learned a brand-new term for this: It's called the "Goomba Fallacy"[1] [1] https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Goomba_fallacy

The renaming tactic used is much more interesting and useful than the fallacy

Re: Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

#494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they said the same thing about books, "young people are hypnotised!" And I agree that it has an impact on vocabulary, it widens it. You learn to talk by hearing other people do it, and youtube is full of different accents and ways of talking. How many parents would take them outside to meet that many different people?

> they said the same thing about books, "young people are hypnotised!" It really doesn't matter what "they" said about books. We are talking about screen time. And screen time has measurably harmful effects on child development. It leads to worse outcomes across the board. Sleep disorders. Obesity. Mental health disorders. Depression. Anxiety. Decreased ability to interpret emotions. Aggressive conduct. And this is t…

aggressive conduct lol, i think youre getting away with yourself there. how come adults are immune to it? i mean youre on social media right this second (decrying it but lets ignore that), how hasnt it affected you in that way? or is this "good" social media?

Re: Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

#496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Youtube will still be accessible it is just the account making/usership which will be banned Then what difference will it make in practice? Do the legislators really think that kids being able to comment on videos was the most harmful thing about the platform? YouTube will still be able to give you suggestions and send you down a rabbit hole of smoothbrain content even if you use it without an account. > I support…

It has some signal value, but it's also a part of creating a culture where social media isn't mandatory in the greater society and the workforce- which has a lot of benefits- and not exposing the next generation to the crushing double demoralisation of AI/Machine learning and social media hyperconnectivity which no generation has had before and could ruin them imo. I do believe in this so ask whatever tricky question…

I don't understand how age restrictions on signup should prevent that, since "greater society and workforce" largely includes people over the age of 18.

I think age restrictions are a misguided attempt at fixing the root issue. I am not against draconian legislation against social media giants, but age restrictions on the internet will negatively affect everyone other than the social media giants the most. I think the main problem with social media right now is the incentives that the tech companies have to optimize for engagement above anything else, and the reason they have that incentive is simple: targeted ads are an insanely lucrative business model. The fix is pretty simple, but draconian: ban any form of targeted advertising on any digital platform.

Age restrictions will just cause a loss of privacy, increase the risk of government censorship, increase the risk of government misusing this for imposing morals and risk causing smaller independent sites to become inaccessible to the young even if they don't actively promote inappropriate content (I will also claim that defining what is child-appropriate content on the internet is impossible). Last but not least, the proposed technical solutions for this, at least in the EU, rely heavily on technologies such as Google Play Integrity and Apple App Attest, which means that they basically require EU citizens to accept Google's or Apple's TOS if they want to participate on the internet, and further preclude them from using an alternative open source operating system such as LineageOS or GrapheneOS. This alone is enough of a reason that I am fiercely against this, but it is by far not the only reason.

Keep the internet free and open for the users, but regulate the hell out of predatory business models.

Re: Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

#498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the concern about how this will be implemented (e.g. selfie and ID submission) is well-founded. I also think that letting tech companies make billions by feeding our youth mental junk food is a problem. I'm not sure where the middle path is, but I think it'll need some real thought to figure out.

If you didn’t realize that making teens verify their age online meant that everyone had to verify their age and identity online, that’s just a dangerous level of stupidity. The issue is everyone wants some quick and easy solution when the truth is we’re going to need to get much more intentional as a society about this. Take phone bans. Everyone wants to ban phones from schools/classrooms, but the truth is in a lot o…

[deleted]

Re: Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

#499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The real kicker to me is that the government has passed a law restricting access yet they haven't determined how they're going to enforce an age check. It's wild that they passed a law without consideration to its mechanics or feasibility. I predict it won't even matter. This law is unenforceable in practice. There is nothing that a bored and highly-motivated teenager who has hours after school to fuck around, won'…

Amazing! Do you have some spare time? Can you quickly mint me a BTC token please. kthxbai ;)

Stealing them is a possibility too. I think the point is still valid.

Re: Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

#500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have a look at Jon Haidt's book The Anxious Generation. He makes the case rather well that we need to cut out the safetyism in the physical world while getting serious about it in the online world. It's not some abstract matter of the morality of kids' digital freedom, it's the tanking of mental health and increase in self-harm and attempted suicide since smartphones came along.

You're trying to treat the symptom of the symptom of the symptom. There are extremely popular movements that claim to stand for their members, but in reality just induce massive paranoia and fear. It is extremely popular to accuse people of being the worst possible based on little to zero information or to actively twist the values and principles of the "opponent" into their opposites. I can find the same mental heal…

It is not the content on social media that is doing the harm in Haidt's model -- beyond the fact that the content is designed to be more stimulating and more interesting to that particular user than "real life".

Haidt argues that social media platforms are designed to be addictive, leveraging variable reward schedules and constant novel stimuli (likes, notifications, new content) to continually trigger dopamine release. This overstimulation of the brain's reward system, which is heavily mediated by dopamine, can lead to several negative consequences.

This constant seeking of instant, shallow rewards trains the brain to crave immediate gratification, making it more difficult for young people to engage with activities that require sustained attention, effort, and delayed gratification, such as reading a book, focusing in school, or building deep real-world relationships. The constant overstimulation can lead to a dysregulation of these pathways, making it harder for individuals to feel motivated by or find pleasure in less stimulating, everyday activities, thus contributing to feelings of boredom, apathy, and a diminished capacity for sustained attention and effort.

If the same exact content were revealed to the user in response to the user's making an effort, undergoing some danger or exercising patience or forbearance, the adverse effect described above would not occur: what causes the adverse effect is stimulation and gratification that requires almost no effort, no risk, no waiting and that is constantly available (even for example when the user is standing in line or riding on a crowded train).

The same thing is true BTW of the effect of porn on the young mind: if a boy can persuade a girl to show him her body, that experience will not tend to damage the boy even if he sees exactly the same thing he would see if he watched a porn video because it almost always requires significant effort to persuade a teenage girl to take off her clothes: among other things, the boy would need exhibit some degree of consistency and predictability in his behavior (exercising his frontal lobes) and to show that he cares about her at least to some minimum standard, which will probably entail learning and remembering many things about her and her recent experiences.

Almost everything in life that is pleasurable or exciting requires significant effort, danger or waiting, not just persuading a teenage girl -- or at least that was the case before the widespread availability of paperback novels, newspapers, comic strips, easily affordable distilled alcohol and drugs, radio, movies, pornography, television, the internet, social media and smartphones.

Post reply on HN