The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents • Hacker News Board

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#121

Post by roryirvine » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 1:16 PM UTC

rich_sasha wrote: post #73

I'm frustrated with how the various internet freedom orgs have handled this over the years. The writing was on the wall for years - it's not the 90s anymore and some compromise on anonymity and verification is coming. Frankly for good reason - I think the social utility of Big Social is massively negative, and even more so for kids. That was the shot of orgs like EFF to help shape the debate in a good direction. Zero…

The same applies to the social media services themselves.

Evidence of harm has been building up over the last decade, so there's been ample opportunity for them to develop effective systems to reduce or mitigate the problems. Instead, they've chosen to do the opposite.

And, if anything, that process has only accelerated over the past 2-3 years - firing moderation teams, amping up the algorithmic feeds, refusing to engage with regulators.

Did they really think their behaviour would have no consequences?

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#122

Post by voakbasda » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

cowboylowrez wrote: post #119

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Banning kids from alcohol, cigarettes, and sex sure did work. I can't think of a single kid I went to school with that did any of these things (and certainly not me). All those laws and rules were absolutely effective in preventing us as kids from doing them. /s

Yeah but we can sanction the parents. If your friends at school were having sex with strangers for money and their parents were doing the pimping, society would like to have a word. Why is letting your kids sext with adult strangers any different? Is it because the only "pimping" you are doing is giving in to your brat nagging for an iphone?

I wonder if creating more laws designed to punish parents correlates with declining birth rates. Sure makes me think twice about having them.

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#123

Post by cowboylowrez » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 1:39 PM UTC

rexpop wrote: post #118

cowboylowrez wrote: post #101

There is nothing good on the internet for kids. If we ban kids from the internet this will all go away. Make a smartphone every bit as regulated as alcohol or cigarettes or sexual intercourse. If a parent is found providing their kids alcohol, cigarettes, sex, or internet, we have to hold them accountable and rehabilitate the kids from their traumatic experience. These parents deserve serious prison terms, and those…

I was afforded limited exposure to alcohol and sex starting around age 13, and I've got a vastly healthier relationship with the two than the rest of my society. I think the internet, however, is a much greater threat to growing minds.

Yeah, I've thought about this some. I as a website owner do not want to babysit your kids. Parents probably do not want me babysitting their kids either. I should be able to put meta data in my website that says "for adults only" and that should be it.

I'm not against kids having some sort of child friendly network access. The trouble is that there is no tech that is child friendly any more, its all vibe coded crap that keeps no one safe at all anymore with hidden traps inside the cesspool of crazies posting all sorts of wierd crap conspiracy shit.

Heck a super beneficial appearing thing like wikipedia is literally an encyclopedia yet the GOP for instance can't stand it if someone talks about any sexuality at all or some other bogyman subject of the hour.

Just ban kids at the internet's points of entry. Phones, Modems. Age gate amateur radio too, no kids interested in amateur radio anymore anyways, no packet switched communications at all until 18 or whatever.

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#124

Post by voakbasda » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 1:42 PM UTC

manwithopinions wrote: post #43

The EFF believes the ends (freedom) justify the means (access to everything good and bad for everyone). Governments are pragmatic, not fundamentalist. This article addresses the technological flaws in age verification, then says “but even if there were, broad restrictions on social media will inevitably limit access to lawful speech, and valuable online communities, and arts and culture.” If the EFF care about freedo…

> Why does the freedom matter above all else? That’s what voters need to be convinced of.

Because without freedom, you cannot really have anything else. You are a slave. Is that really what you want to be? Or how we want children to be raised?

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#125

Post by cowboylowrez » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 1:44 PM UTC

voakbasda wrote: post #122

cowboylowrez wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but we can sanction the parents. If your friends at school were having sex with strangers for money and their parents were doing the pimping, society would like to have a word. Why is letting your kids sext with adult strangers any different? Is it because the only "pimping" you are doing is giving in to your brat nagging for an iphone?

I wonder if creating more laws designed to punish parents correlates with declining birth rates. Sure makes me think twice about having them.

No, I'm pretty sure declining birthrates are caused by the smartphones, either that or the AI lied to me again but I'm still pretty sure its the smartphones.

"Recent economic research links the rise of smartphones to the persistent decline in birth rates. A National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) study estimates that early smartphone adoption accounts for 33% to 52% of the drop in the U.S. general fertility rate, particularly among teenagers and young adults under 30"

-- this quote is from AI and could be a complete fabrication

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#126

Post by IshKebab » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 1:51 PM UTC

cowboylowrez wrote: post #101

There is nothing good on the internet for kids. If we ban kids from the internet this will all go away. Make a smartphone every bit as regulated as alcohol or cigarettes or sexual intercourse. If a parent is found providing their kids alcohol, cigarettes, sex, or internet, we have to hold them accountable and rehabilitate the kids from their traumatic experience. These parents deserve serious prison terms, and those…

[flagged]

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#127

Post by IshKebab » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 1:54 PM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #108

hactually wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you don't use YouTube?

Nobody needs to. It's an addictive cancer just like TikTok.

It's not. Tiktok is pure time wasting fluff definitely, but YouTube is a mix of that and genuinely great content.

Go and watch 3blue1brown and then tell me it's addictive cancer.

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#128

Post by oliwarner » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 1:57 PM UTC

cowboylowrez wrote: post #105

oliwarner wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell me you don't have teenagers without telling me you don't have teenagers. I'd love kids to do what they're told. That would absolutely solve this but as we all know, they don't. But how are your rights limited?

Who's buying your kids internet access? Are they getting it on a street corner from a stranger? lol I doubt it.

They could, yes. You can buy 5GB of service for £2.50 at many convenience stores. Paid cash.

This is such a weird angle. Like saying shops shouldn't age check for alcohol because the parents would know.

They are also friends with other children who have their own parents, devices and network access. Your child doesn't live in a bubble you have control over.

These are all the same fantasy arguments that completely ignore the pervasiveness of the internet and the tenacity of determined children. 15 years of waiting to see if social networks can fix this themselves has only shown us how much they want to exploit us all. They earned this.

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#129

Post by ilovecake1984 » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 3:05 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #115

ilovecake1984 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube is very mixed. Putting short form content on it was a mistake. It’s only not trash if you use it correctly. Watch some videos by some racists, you get fed videos making you racist. It has all the negatives of social media. Ideal the UK would just make platforms responsible as publishers. This is the dividing line which should apply for under 18s.

> It’s only not trash if you use it correctly. > Watch some videos by some racists, you get fed videos making you racist. So don't watch some videos by some racists, and curate your feed properly. I don't see why the government needs to get involved here. >This is the dividing line which should apply for under 18s. The problem is the dividing line won't stay there. A lot of people want social media regulated or banne…

Sure. But I’m just not that fussed about online freedom of speech. World was fine before it and will be fine after it.

Re: The UK's new under-16 social media ban will cause more harm than it prevents

#130

Post by ilovecake1984 » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 3:09 PM UTC

rimeice wrote: post #48

ilovecake1984 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s overwhelmingly supported action. The technical incoherence doesn’t matter. What matters is being able to say “you can’t use Snapchat” and then they say “my friend xxx uses it” you can say “xxx’s parent are delinquent” This isn’t about blocking as much as setting societal expectations.

Totally agree. Setting the tone is so important. It’s so bad it’s “illegal” is a lot more convincing than saying to your kid, “well the research shows…”

Totally. The next step is a national campaign explaining how apple screen time and android family works. In the Uk we had a lot of shock adverts for drinking driving. The same thing with online harms would go a long way.