Live data from Hacker News

The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

techdirt.com

111–120 of 156 posts

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#111
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem like there's been a precipitous drop in resources compared to the decades of requests and warnings that have led up to this point. So what's different now, if not resourcing?

Resources have never been higher. Theres an expectation now that the schools will do everything and pay for everything but its never enough.

Pay is comically non competitive - a fraction of what it would need to be to reconstitute the sixties.

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember which state it was but they spent 2/3+ of the entire states education budget on one underperming school district. In the end they ended up with new buildings but the scores went down because school spending isn't actually correlated with student success.

The postwar American glory period depended on the fact that half the brain power of society couldn’t get a job except in teaching. Now the sort of women who taught me in high school are federal judges and captains of industry. Teacher salaries would need to be two or three times as high to get the quality of the period of American greatness.

Of course it had nothing to do with America's having been on the winning coalition in two world wars or its being the only developed country whose homeland was not devastated by the second of the two wars because those reasons wouldn't feed into the narrative that America is prosperous because it benefited from oppression (of women in this case).

Somehow the much greater oppression of women in the Islamic world doesn't make the Islamic world prosperous.

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#113
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At what cost though? Everyone will now need to submit real ID to access social media. Smaller social media sites will probably just shutdown since it’s unlikely they can afford the whole verification process.

The same was true of food safety. Aunt Tracey might not be able to sell cupcakes from her home any more (made in the oven next to where the cat likes to sleep because of the heat), but we centralised things enough that when BSE and Salmonella outbreaks happen, which nowadays is extremely rare, we know how and why almost immediately. If the cost of ridding ourselves of animal torture, terrorism and child pornography i…

That is a weird analogy because so much of modern food borne illnesses we deal with today are because of the fact that we centralized food production so any contamination effects hundreds or more people at a time which necessitated strict safety regulations. If you ate Aunt Tracey's stuff and got sick, maybe a handful of people at most get sick, if you eat Aunt Tracey's Original Recipe Cupcake™, thousands of people could get sick.

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#114
post #3

> Again, every detailed study on the subject has found that the number of teenagers who have negative experiences on social media is tiny. The study they linked is just self reported data from an internet survey. I'm sure that 13 year olds who don't get enough sleep because they're endlessly scrolling through ads, influencers, and disinformation don't see any problem with it the same way that a survey of alcoholics w…

It would be equally disingenuous to not ask children what they think, we already marginalize childrens views and ideas and they often suffer under restrictive laws because they can't effectively fight any legislation or legal rulings.

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#115
post #61
post #57

A lot of issues require holding two ideas in your head at once. Age verification chips away at privacy and internet freedom. It likely also reduces harm to some/many/whatever children, even if it’s imperfect and won’t stop everyone. The interesting question is where the right trade off sits. People often end up arguing only one side.

Massively downplaying it to say "chips away" this takes a sledgehammer to the core of internet privacy. In all cases in the world where this has been done before like China or Russia, freedom is also lost shortly after. Of course people only argue one side, the stakes are losing internet privacy and freedom in the entire world if the west also succumbs to these authoritarian policies. It isn't the government's job to…

What internet privacy? Look at the sites this is being enforced on and tell me with a straight face you have privacy accessing those. Even for sites like X i'd argue truly anonymous users are horrible to have. Users should be accountable for what they say online in common public spaces. You want free speech and anonymity go to those spaces not facebook and X.

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember which state it was but they spent 2/3+ of the entire states education budget on one underperming school district. In the end they ended up with new buildings but the scores went down because school spending isn't actually correlated with student success.

The postwar American glory period depended on the fact that half the brain power of society couldn’t get a job except in teaching. Now the sort of women who taught me in high school are federal judges and captains of industry. Teacher salaries would need to be two or three times as high to get the quality of the period of American greatness.

> ... couldn't get a job except in teaching.

Or nursing, or a fair number of other career tracks. Perhaps as important, there were plenty of smaller and family-owned firms. In many of those, talented women could get quite a ways ahead - though perhaps with less public acknowledgement than is currently fashionable.

> Now the sort of women who taught me in high school are federal judges and captains of industry.

Your HS teachers were in the 0.001%? No 2X, 3X, or even 25X to teacher salaries could replace a meaningful fraction of today's teachers with such people - because, by definition, the supply does not exist.

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#117
The requirement to show ID is not to perform age verification to ban children from services.

The requirement to show ID is so that every user (especially adults) online can be real-world identified and located. This allows the state to privately and quietly retaliate for any sort of posts or publications or link-sharing that they don't like.

It's a ban on anonymous publishing, anonymous speech. It's so that they can simply and easily retaliate against publishers that don't have a legal department and media team (i.e. you).

This is a fundamental attack on freedom of expression by adults, by prohibiting anonymous use of the internet. It has precisely zero to do with children.

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>China or Russia, freedom is also lost shortly after. This may come as a shock but neither China or Russia had their first encounter with losses of individual freedom in the 1990s. This is what the OP is talking about, this is the kind of shibboleth of online libertarianism that has little to do with real world policy outcomes. You'll find many similar laws concerning child safety in Norway that you find in China, di…

I mean, you're cutting off the qualifier with your selected quote. They are clearly talking about online freedom: > this takes a sledgehammer to the core of internet privacy. In all cases in the world where this has been done before like China or Russia, freedom is also lost shortly after. Russia's first online censorship was for truly abhorrent things. It moved on to become a ban on things the government didn't like…

>It wasn't overnight, but it was a constant effort by those in power to erode privacy and freedom

yes because Russia is a dictatorship. These recent age limits on social media have had broad public support and are widely supported by parents. Not having your kid grow up on a combination of porn, gambling and body dysphoria and their data exfiltrated by a US mega-corporation isn't the dawn of internet censorship. What about the privacy of children and the ability to grow up outside of the morass of commercial surveillance platforms?

Having your kids grow up free from that crap doesn't make you China, it makes you ca 1990s Denmark. Japan and China both have strict gun control laws, but Japan's a democracy. People are free to live by different values than Americans, just screaming red scares isn't going to convince anyone.

Re: The UK's Teen Social Media Ban Is Political Theater, Not Child Safety Policy

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a joke. Throwing around auth casually like this normalizes it.

The UK is an actual movie trope for pushing more and more authoritarian with their massive amount of surveillance and petty regulations and restrictions. I don't think it is a joke at all, they have been continuously moving that way the last few decades. Just because some places are or were at one time worse that doesn't absolve the UK from guilt.

This seems like a popular law you don’t agree with though most of your country does for valid reasons. Nothing about that seems authoritarian especially with actual auth stuff on this side of the pond.
Post reply on HN