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

Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 87 posts

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#21

Post by boscillator »

ketzu wrote: post #5
tolugenius wrote: post #2

> Liu also said Texas had established that TikTok's "Restricted Mode" did not work as advertised and exposed minors to content the company said would be filtered out. I don't use tiktok, can someone explain what the restrict mode was advertised as vs does? If it's like any social media limiter it's perhaps a softer thing (time limit) than a hard thing (ie, designed to put the onus on the user).

Based on their faq: https://www.tiktok.com/support/faq_detail?category=web_accou... > You shouldn't see mature or complex themes, such as: > • Profanity > • Sexually suggestive content > • Realistic violence or threatening imagery > • Firearms or weapons in an environment that isn't appropriate > • Illegal or controlled substances/drugs > • Explicit references to mature or complex themes that may reflect personal exp…

I wonder what counts as a complex theme? Surely that is a euphemism for something, but I can't figure out what it would be and certainly don't trust TikTok to do a good job of deciding what is too complex for the youth's minds.

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#22

Post by mcmcmc »

ketzu wrote: post #5
tolugenius wrote: post #2

> Liu also said Texas had established that TikTok's "Restricted Mode" did not work as advertised and exposed minors to content the company said would be filtered out. I don't use tiktok, can someone explain what the restrict mode was advertised as vs does? If it's like any social media limiter it's perhaps a softer thing (time limit) than a hard thing (ie, designed to put the onus on the user).

Based on their faq: https://www.tiktok.com/support/faq_detail?category=web_accou... > You shouldn't see mature or complex themes, such as: > • Profanity > • Sexually suggestive content > • Realistic violence or threatening imagery > • Firearms or weapons in an environment that isn't appropriate > • Illegal or controlled substances/drugs > • Explicit references to mature or complex themes that may reflect personal exp…

Curious what they consider an “appropriate environment” for firearms and weapons

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#23

Post by phendrenad2 »

pmdr wrote: post #12

TikTok isn't even safe for adults, let alone children.

The open internet isn't safe for adults, either. There is some serious misinformation out there, and it's high time we restrict the internet to only high-IQ people. (/sarc)

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#24

Post by phendrenad2 »

intrasight wrote: post #18
consensus1 wrote: post #14

There's only 3 options for the internet: 1. free for all 2. locked down with ID checked age gates 3. sanitized with no adult content at all If we put responsibility for keeping kids safe on companies we will get 2 or 3. The only good option is that parents need to actually parent their kids.

Those are not mutually exclusive. I'll take #1 and #2 combined, thank you very much. #3 is the purview of the advertisers and CC companies.

How long do you think you'll have #1 and #2 before someone in government realizes they can dox people they don't like?

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#26

Post by esseph »

lynx97 wrote: post #15
jjice wrote: post #8

It blows my mind that parents let their children use these platforms with these safety features. I just found out yesterday that my cousin lets their 5ish year old have a TikTok account, but they have to allow or deny anyone who follows. How absurd is that. It doesn't block anything about what they view (I assume they relied on this safety feature), and there's no way that vetting who can follow (family and friends)…

Instead of sueing the platforms, the parents should be subjected to CPS, on a daily basis.

Go after the drug dealers ffs

Are you a friend of Larry Ellison by chance? His ideas don't stop at kids.

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#27

Post by deberon »

lynx97 wrote: post #17
consensus1 wrote: post #14

There's only 3 options for the internet: 1. free for all 2. locked down with ID checked age gates 3. sanitized with no adult content at all If we put responsibility for keeping kids safe on companies we will get 2 or 3. The only good option is that parents need to actually parent their kids.

This is soooo true. But unfortunately, whenever you confront a parent with their responsibilities, they immediately lash out with excuses. "How should I know." "There is already sooo much work to do." "In these times ..." All lazy ass excuses by people who obviously have no idea what responsibility they have.

This comment is just a lazy attempt at changing minds. Why don’t you get off your ass and actually institute real change in the world? We’re all waiting. This is your responsibility after all, according to me. From here on out, all unresolved problems are the fault of lynx97 being a lazy slackass. So says me, with the power of a random internet person assigning responsibilities. Consider yourself confronted. I’ll await your excuses.

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#28

Post by order-matters »

jjice wrote: post #8

It blows my mind that parents let their children use these platforms with these safety features. I just found out yesterday that my cousin lets their 5ish year old have a TikTok account, but they have to allow or deny anyone who follows. How absurd is that. It doesn't block anything about what they view (I assume they relied on this safety feature), and there's no way that vetting who can follow (family and friends)…

I feel the average person is not equipped to understand the implications. being educated / intelligent means you have likely picked up some neuroscience knowledge and it has stuck for you over the years. Even if it is not your "field" we all have a brain and if you like knowledge then you recognize it's useful to know about it.

The average person, especially the below average person, is better off trusting others than their own judgement - since most people know more than them.

You need to talk to your cousin. No one else is going to.

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#29

Post by [deleted] »

lynx97 wrote: post #15
jjice wrote: post #8

It blows my mind that parents let their children use these platforms with these safety features. I just found out yesterday that my cousin lets their 5ish year old have a TikTok account, but they have to allow or deny anyone who follows. How absurd is that. It doesn't block anything about what they view (I assume they relied on this safety feature), and there's no way that vetting who can follow (family and friends)…

Instead of sueing the platforms, the parents should be subjected to CPS, on a daily basis.

[deleted]

Re: Texas judge rules TikTok misled users on child safety feature

#30

Post by foobar_______ »

jjice wrote: post #8

It blows my mind that parents let their children use these platforms with these safety features. I just found out yesterday that my cousin lets their 5ish year old have a TikTok account, but they have to allow or deny anyone who follows. How absurd is that. It doesn't block anything about what they view (I assume they relied on this safety feature), and there's no way that vetting who can follow (family and friends)…

I try to be open-minded to other parenting techniques... but I just don't have the brain power to internalize how any remotely self-aware human let's a 5 year old use tik tok. Poor kid.
Post reply on HN