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

UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

manchestereveningnews.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 302 posts

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#121

Post by deadbabe »

Aurornis wrote: post #74
atollk wrote: post #29

I know many people dislike this movement but really, I think it's a good idea. Yes, it removes the "free" internet as it was 20 years ago, but that's gone already anyway. Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access, but arguing against any law to be against that just seems like straight up anarchism to me. I see both children and adults being manipulated by corporations with "algorith…

> but really, I think it's a good idea. > Yes, it removes the "free" internet > Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access Is anyone else as stunned as I am by how many posters on tech websites have suddenly gone full anti-free-internet and embracing the police state? The internet I grew up on was all about freedom and resisting the police state. Now the top voted comment (at least a…

> You think it's a good idea to force us all to produce ID to watch YouTube videos or read a post on Reddit? This is what you want?

No, I want more. I want us to not be able to use these sites at all.

The modern internet has become a cesspool. There’s some good stuff here and there but it’s not worth the overly negative downsides. Reddit is mostly bots. YouTube is becoming clickbait slop. Social Media platforms are ruining society.

We need an alternative to the internet. Not long ago, we did not have all these things and it was one of the best times to be alive.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#122

Post by gib444 »

Fervicus wrote: post #31

Somehow all the countries are suddenly proposing the same thing. You'd think at least one of these countries might try something different if they actually cared about the kids, like banning algorithmic feeds. Not suspicious at all.

Not beyond the realms of possibility that Meta etc has decided it wants government/photo ID and has convinced governments to implement it

Big tech will act inconvenienced but they will in reality benefit

Just like any attempt by a UK Gov to fix housing: they just make it worse, because that was the real aim (yes I include the latest renter's rights legislation)

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#124

Post by drnick1 »

stavros wrote: post #54
jonplackett wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I needed a good reason to quit social media. This can be it.

He posted, on a social media website.

HN is not "social media," in a conventional sense, far from it. For one, it is completely anonymous, at least if you want it to be.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#125

Post by gadders »

atollk wrote: post #29

I know many people dislike this movement but really, I think it's a good idea. Yes, it removes the "free" internet as it was 20 years ago, but that's gone already anyway. Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access, but arguing against any law to be against that just seems like straight up anarchism to me. I see both children and adults being manipulated by corporations with "algorith…

It's a good idea, as long as this clown show of a government doesn't link it to mandatory digital IDs.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#126

Post by elmomle »

_heimdall wrote: post #108
SkyeCA wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over time it's become harder and harder to deny how bad some aspects of the internet are for people, especially for young people. Whether it's right or wrong it's not shocking that people are more willing than ever to entertain the idea of internet restrictions.

I'd dig deeper on the problem though. More fundamentally, laws like this are based on the fundamental assumption that both children and their parents can't make good decisions and that the state must instead force the right decisions on them.

Yet we have laws around child endangerment. I'm a big supporter of parental sovereignty, but I also acknowledge that if society operates the way it does, I can't immediately think of a good reason why "mental health endangerment" (which social media for kids very much is) wouldn't be included in the broader scope of endangerment.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#127

Post by butchkass »

datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #64
atollk wrote: post #29

I know many people dislike this movement but really, I think it's a good idea. Yes, it removes the "free" internet as it was 20 years ago, but that's gone already anyway. Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access, but arguing against any law to be against that just seems like straight up anarchism to me. I see both children and adults being manipulated by corporations with "algorith…

Isn’t it already impossible to be anonymous on the internet without flawless opsec? I’m surprised there isn’t a TV Tropes article about it but whenever a character in a show needs to be perfectly anonymous they visit an Internet cafe with a baseball cap and glasses - which while it’s a trope I think it also plays on our cultural understanding that significant diligence is required to maintain anonymity. Edit: though…

There’s a middle ground between going to cybercafes with sunglasses, and submitting a 4K scan of you gov ID before watching a YouTube video where someone says a bad word.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#128

Post by Aurornis »

techblueberry wrote: post #107
Aurornis wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but really, I think it's a good idea. > Yes, it removes the "free" internet > Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access Is anyone else as stunned as I am by how many posters on tech websites have suddenly gone full anti-free-internet and embracing the police state? The internet I grew up on was all about freedom and resisting the police state. Now the top voted comment (at least a…

As an engineer, I tend to view solutions in terms of tradeoffs and not absolutes. 20 years ago the free and open internet was great. Now I think we’ve gone too far. And more to the point, I think freedom is protected by regulation, not by handing decisions over to whatever billionaire won a cage match. This is the gen-x part of my xennial talking, but I can’t help but feel like something has been lost when nothing is…

> A lot of people say this is dumb because teenagers will figure out a way to bypass it. Good! That’s what teenagers are supposed to do.

So the teenagers bypass it and use other sites while us adults are handing our IDs over just to use basic websites?

How is this good?

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#129

Post by [deleted] »

techblueberry wrote: post #115
_heimdall wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd dig deeper on the problem though. More fundamentally, laws like this are based on the fundamental assumption that both children and their parents can't make good decisions and that the state must instead force the right decisions on them.

Creativity requires limitations. > More fundamentally, laws like this are based on the fundamental assumption that both children and their parents can't make good decisions and that the state must instead force the right decisions on them. Also yeah? Sure? You may not like that that’s the conclusion. Why does everyone say this like it’s some kind of gotcha? Children are incapable biologically of making good decisions…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN