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

Teenagers and the Internet

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 125 posts

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#51

Post by qb45 »

DanBC wrote: post #47
3pt14159 wrote: post #11

I've had the internet for twenty years (since I was 8) and computer access since I was 3. Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Some kids who have poor role models are going to ask for oral sex from boys or girls that like them. This was true 3000 years ago. It is true today. It will be true twenty years from now regardless of what silly idea the person who made the documentary h…

> They arn't children. They are teenagers. Have you ever met a teenager? They're fucking idiotic. That's why we don't let them drink alcohol or vote or get married or have sex or join the army or a bunch of other stuff. > You know those dirty letters you got from your sweetheart when you were 17? Sexting is the same damn thing. No it isn't. A dirty letter is a dirty letter. A photo sent via sms has lasting consequenc…

Have you ever met a teenager? They're fucking idiotic.

Partially because being protected from consequences of their actions, they can afford being idiotic.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#52

Post by unimpressive »

67726e wrote: post #22
unimpressive wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>a better answer would be to discuss pornography addiction as part of the sexual education curriculum, but too many people would consider it "teaching children porn". Sort of like how DARE teaches children drugs?

About that.... > the program was sometimes counterproductive in some populations, with those who graduated from D.A.R.E. later having higher than average rates of drug use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Abuse_Resistance_Education...

Normally the phrasing I used indicates satire. In my case I was entirely serious. (That is, I'm well aware that DARE does in fact seem to teach drugs.)

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#53

Post by 3pt14159 »

nissimk wrote: post #31
3pt14159 wrote: post #11

I've had the internet for twenty years (since I was 8) and computer access since I was 3. Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Some kids who have poor role models are going to ask for oral sex from boys or girls that like them. This was true 3000 years ago. It is true today. It will be true twenty years from now regardless of what silly idea the person who made the documentary h…

I'm very upset that this is the top comment on here. 14 year old teenagers are definitely children and they do need to be protected by law from predators. Just because they are old enough to have children of their own doesn't make them adults. Is not OK for sites or individuals to be collecting sexual images of children and distributing them. Also, to all you folks on here saying that this is all fear mongering to ta…

Just to be 100% crystal clear:

I think teenagers still make mistakes and I do not support photos of them being in general circulation in any form. I am upset at a boyfriend getting charged with CP possession when his girlfriends parents find out that they are sexting.

I also am against photos of teenagers getting distributed, but some teenagers look for teenage porn, and it shouldn't be as big of an offence as actual CP.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#54

Post by pitt1980 »

nicholassmith wrote: post #7

It's interesting, the Internet has become a micro-society and people are beginning to have expectations that the major players have a responsibility to perform a similar service as that of a government (contributing resources to fight child porn as the example made), whilst also expecting governments to rule it. Can we have it both ways? And should we expect that as a norm? The internet doesn't have a morality, it's…

" My generation (approaching 30) were among the first to have always on, reasonably high speed internet and yes that did mean easy access to pornography but despite that the majority of us are in long term relationships."

My impression is that this generation has historical low levels of involvement in long term relationships and family formation

(not arguing that causality is internet porn ---> people don't get married, but it's an interesting data point)

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#55

Post by themstheones »

bennyg wrote: post #28
ttt_ wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Much akin to "when we were kids we rode in the front seat without seat belts on, we turned out fine", and several other versions of that phrase. I don't think it's a valid argument at all.

I don't think your point's valid either. Driving is operating heavy machinery, plain and simple. Driving without a seatbelt is totally different than using Facebook, or eBay, or Craigslist, unrestricted. They really couldn't be more dissimilar.

No one is going to get into trouble on craigslist. What's the worst that could happen, buying a couch with bedbugs?

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#56

Post by dictum »

nissimk wrote: post #31
3pt14159 wrote: post #11

I've had the internet for twenty years (since I was 8) and computer access since I was 3. Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Some kids who have poor role models are going to ask for oral sex from boys or girls that like them. This was true 3000 years ago. It is true today. It will be true twenty years from now regardless of what silly idea the person who made the documentary h…

I'm very upset that this is the top comment on here. 14 year old teenagers are definitely children and they do need to be protected by law from predators. Just because they are old enough to have children of their own doesn't make them adults. Is not OK for sites or individuals to be collecting sexual images of children and distributing them. Also, to all you folks on here saying that this is all fear mongering to ta…

> the recent cultural shift with the prevalence of handheld computing has a lot of negative side effects and we need to rethink the norms

One possible rethinking of the norms would be to worry less about teenagers, letting them sext if that's their thing, and advising them to not let societal abuse (e.g. bullying) get to them.

Scenario: a teenager sends a nude picture to a friend and the picture becomes public.

Possible solutions:

1. We keep teenagers from sexting, and people from seeing pictures that teenagers sexted.

2. We learn to not abuse teenagers who sexted and had their pictures leaked.

The latter is harder, but it's better long term. You can force people to not do what might harm them somehow, but you should look at the fundamentals: why do people suffer consequences when they sext? Is it because of the sexting itself, or the reaction people have to it?

> I'm very upset that this is the top comment on here. 14 year old teenagers are definitely children and they do need to be protected by law from predators. Just because they are old enough to have children of their own doesn't make them adults. Is not OK for sites or individuals to be collecting sexual images of children and distributing them.

Age is a spectrum. A better definition of, say, a 16 year old would be "not quite an adult, not quite a child". They're closer to adulthood than to childhood, but still don't have some of the baggage of adulthood. Talk to a 16 year old and you'll find out that they don't want that lack of baggage to keep them from enjoying the benefits of being treated like adults. I doubt having a line drawn that says you're not an adult until you're 18 years old, and until then you're still a child will keep working in this century. It worked when social dynamics between teenagers and adults were different.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#57

Post by onebaddude »

shortlived wrote: post #34
msluyter wrote: post #27

Given the absence of real data (as in, studies that demonstrate conclusively that watching too much online porn has certain downsides), it's not surprising that a lot of comments are resorting to anecdotal reasoning of the form: "Well, I use the internet and I'm ok..." Nonetheless, I think it's worth entertaining the hypothesis that in many ways the internet is like candy for your brain, and constant exposure might h…

Do we need real data to know that too much porn is a bad thing? > The problem is that these are the same sorts of arguments > that have been deployed in the face of every technological > advance I agree and at the risk of sounding like my parents, I think the internet is different. Never before has their been a technology so all encompassing and so powerful (and dangerous). If I wanted to look at pictures of girls wh…

>Do we need real data to know that too much porn is a bad thing?

Yes, we do. We also need a definition of "too much". For too many people, "too much" means "more than I prefer."

>If I wanted to look at pictures of girls when I was a horny teen, I had the bra section of the JC Penny catalog.

Those pictures fulfill the same purpose as looking at a girl with no clothes. The motivation was the same.

>The jump from that to the type of online porn that exists today is pretty big

You know what's an even bigger jump? Going from looking at pictures to actually seeing a real naked female, or actually having sex. That's as "hardcore" as it gets for a person, no? Yet everyone manages, forever throughout human history, often with no intermediate steps of seeing pictures of women. Crazy, I know.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#58

Post by nicholassmith »

pitt1980 wrote: post #54
nicholassmith wrote: post #7

It's interesting, the Internet has become a micro-society and people are beginning to have expectations that the major players have a responsibility to perform a similar service as that of a government (contributing resources to fight child porn as the example made), whilst also expecting governments to rule it. Can we have it both ways? And should we expect that as a norm? The internet doesn't have a morality, it's…

" My generation (approaching 30) were among the first to have always on, reasonably high speed internet and yes that did mean easy access to pornography but despite that the majority of us are in long term relationships." My impression is that this generation has historical low levels of involvement in long term relationships and family formation (not arguing that causality is internet porn ---> people don't get marr…

Sure, marriage does seem to be down amongst the people I know in long term relationships but that mostly seems to be (in my circle) down to apathy about the concept, as they deem it pointless. "Who needs paper and a £10k party to show your love?" sort of thing.

There's a big melting pot of changes in our society, and I do think the internet has played a part as has changing opinions on religion, finance and wealth and so on.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#59

Post by ta_1378992718 »

DanBC wrote: post #47
3pt14159 wrote: post #11

I've had the internet for twenty years (since I was 8) and computer access since I was 3. Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Some kids who have poor role models are going to ask for oral sex from boys or girls that like them. This was true 3000 years ago. It is true today. It will be true twenty years from now regardless of what silly idea the person who made the documentary h…

> They arn't children. They are teenagers. Have you ever met a teenager? They're fucking idiotic. That's why we don't let them drink alcohol or vote or get married or have sex or join the army or a bunch of other stuff. > You know those dirty letters you got from your sweetheart when you were 17? Sexting is the same damn thing. No it isn't. A dirty letter is a dirty letter. A photo sent via sms has lasting consequenc…

So, you are in favor of the current remediation against teenagers that sext, which is generally to bring the recipient up on charges of possession of child pornography and the sender on charges of making and distributing child pornography?

Such felony convictions will have far more ramifications that the act itself ever could.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#60

Post by cafard »

qb45 wrote: post #51
DanBC wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They arn't children. They are teenagers. Have you ever met a teenager? They're fucking idiotic. That's why we don't let them drink alcohol or vote or get married or have sex or join the army or a bunch of other stuff. > You know those dirty letters you got from your sweetheart when you were 17? Sexting is the same damn thing. No it isn't. A dirty letter is a dirty letter. A photo sent via sms has lasting consequenc…

Have you ever met a teenager? They're fucking idiotic. Partially because being protected from consequences of their actions, they can afford being idiotic.

But also partly because they are unable to imagine the consequence of their actions. With cars and guns the protection goes only so far.
Post reply on HN