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

The kids with phones are alright

heatherburns.tech

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 458 posts

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#291

Post by neutronicus »

jhbadger wrote: post #195
worble wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you, it's been infuriating reading these social media bans for children, as if when kids suddenly turn 16 or 18 or whatever magical nimber the courts come up with, they are suddenly immune to the psychological tricks from multi million dollar companies hiring the best psychologists with no morals money can buy. Social media needs to be heavily regulated to the point where it's safe for everyone, or banned entir…

For starters, what's "social media"? It's kind of a undefinable phrase. Obviously Facebook and Instagram are agreed to be "social media".But is Youtube social media? How about HN? Or any website with a comment section?

I’d start with “platform on which it’s possible to become an Influencer” and work backwards.

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#292

Post by RunSet »

Triphibian wrote: post #87
GeekyBear wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I would rather see public resources used to teach parents how to use the existing controls (in iOS and Android) to restrict what their own kids can do on their own smartphone. However, if a school district wants to restrict the use of smartphones during the school day for all students, I would be OK with that.

Where's the setting to make YouTube not display shorts?

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-short...

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#293

Post by graemep »

schnitzelstoat wrote: post #182
skhr0680 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Teenagers learning how to have a couple of beers with a meal would be an improvement on them turning 18/20/21 and going and getting hammered on shots

In Europe, I think it is more common tbh. Even in the UK my dad would let me try making cocktails etc. at the weekend when I was 17. It meant when I got to university I knew how much I could drink (although as a student I was too poor to drink much anyway haha) whereas there were people drinking like half a bottle of vodka. I don't drink any alcohol nowadays so it's not like it turned me into an alcoholic either.

Its usually in the UK in my experience to give teenagers wine, beer or cider with meals.

16 year olds can currently have them with a meal in a restaurant or pub. Until a few years ago it was 14.

> It meant when I got to university I knew how much I could drink (although as a student I was too poor to drink much anyway haha) whereas there were people drinking like half a bottle of vodka.

I gave my kids some alcoholic drinks for just that reason.

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#294

Post by ClumsyPilot »

nrabulinski wrote: post #11
j45 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Age 16-17 is very different than Ages 5-10 for kids to carry a device. The former is no issue. I just don't think the author's take is nuanced as they think. Kids (Age 5-13) safety is of ultimate importance. Devices, independently are also a major issue in schools. Social media use of bullying also is a major issue. To the point they are banned.

Except social media as a concept isn’t the issue. I’ve been bullied before social media was mainstream. A little later in life, when internet as a whole was majorly taking off, it helped me actually socialize. I met people some of whom I’m friends to this day, but more importantly - I could meet people to go out with, to talk to. Should we ban schools then? Because school grounds are famously place where the most bul…

> Except social media as a concept isn’t the issue

Are you sure about that? So far the negatives vastly outweigh the positives. Imagine a statement:

> as a concept there isn’t an issue with a social credit score / great firewall / reeducation camp as long as they are done by a competent well-meaning person

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#295

Post by graemep »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #129
skhr0680 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Teenagers learning how to have a couple of beers with a meal would be an improvement on them turning 18/20/21 and going and getting hammered on shots

I think the evidence points the other way. Giving younger people a drink with their meal during adolescence leads to more drinking problems later in life.

As far as I know the evidence points to getting drunk younger leads to more drinking problems later in life. Drinking moderately younger leads to fewer.

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#296

Post by alt227 »

karahime wrote: post #265
alt227 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I very much hope we continue to bring our children up outside of a digital world, encouraging them to interact and learn physically before introducing them to digital devices later in life when they can treat them sensibly as a small part of a healthy and full life. Giving addictive and attention stealing tech to children from a young age is like giving drugs to rats, they will continue to hit the feeder bar until th…

Old style rat drug experiments with rats in a barren cage being administered morphine are barely a good behavioral model for rats, let alone people. This is the aforementioned moral panic language. If the point was that solid it wouldn't need to make this multi-step analogy.

We can agree to disagree, thats fine. You give your kids mobiles and tablets from toddler age and I will bring mine up in the physical world and introduce them to tech gently over time, finally giving them full smart devices later in life when they are responsible enough to manage their own time.

> If the point was that solid it wouldn't need to make this multi-step analogy.

Analogies are always useful to show logical similarities in somebodies thinking pattern. The fact you dismiss them shows you have no interest in thinking about anything other than your own point. Again thats fine, we can agree to disagree. I wonder if you will show me the same courtesy.

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#297

Post by graemep »

ColdStream wrote: post #150
goalieca wrote: post #17

Personally, I don’t even think adults with phones are alright.

That is a fair take. Yes the kids are particularly susceptible to these things but some equally concerning behavior comes from adults that one wished the knew better. Unfortunately, a lot of people run teenage software on adult hardware and that is a wild combo.

I am not even sure kids are more susceptible. Plenty of addicted adults.

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#298

Post by ceejayoz »

philipallstar wrote: post #241
kraf wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not familiar with what you're talking about. Can you share a real world example of a case like this? You're saying a social media comment about a crime is somehow punished harshly and much harsher than the crime itself?

Here's an overview of the situation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62ln7mzd5ro

Are you sure that link's the one you meant to share?

> The former childminder from Northampton, who is married to a Conservative councillor, had posted an abhorrent message on X, calling for people to "set fire" to hotels housing asylum seekers following the murder of three young girls at a dance class in Southport in July 2024.

> Yet the fact both men were able to address a huge crowd in London is perhaps evidence that there is rather more leeway for free speech in this country than those likening the UK to a "tin pot dictatorship" suggest.

Seems fine?

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#299

Post by bcjdjsndon »

gherkinnn wrote: post #156
NoPicklez wrote: post #96

My question to these sorts of articles is, okay so what do we do then? What do we do when we know that social media it not healthy for kids. Its not good for their attention spans or mental health to a much greater degree than other forms of media. Nobody is saying kids shouldn't have phones, but they should be able to use them without being engulfed in social media content that has been shown to have a negative impa…

Social media, as we have it today, is not healthy for anybody. It is bad, truly bad, and the companies responsible know it. You can't lace beer with crack and sell it. Not to a 12yo, not to a 50yo. Regulate the proverbial crack, then we see if further regulations are required. Earlier this year (0): > “We will launch during a dynamic political environment where many civil society groups that we would expect to attack…

> Social media, as we have it today, is not healthy for anybody

Define social media, specifically name the sites you're talking about. And explicitly state the ill health that follows when you consume social media

Re: The kids with phones are alright

#300

Post by bcjdjsndon »

StingyJelly wrote: post #47

Kids with phones are alright. Attention economy of social media is not. As did tabaco companies, they (soc. media tech giants) push proposals to regulate phone use based on age in hopes that the their information asymmetry advantage and addictive dark patterns that are the problem in the first place won't be regulated and they can keep exploiting the public held in their trap by network effect.

> Attention economy of social media is not

Because of chungus memes? I think you might be over reacting there bro

Post reply on HN