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

Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

techoversight.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 170 posts

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#121

Post by phatfish »

alamortsubite wrote: post #90

The "weird" thing about YouTube Shorts is no matter how many times you hide them (by clicking "Not Interested" or "Show fewer of these", however they label it), YouTube will continue to show them to you in your feed. I've hidden that crap 100 times and no doubt it'll be back soon.

Revanced YouTube app, turn off all the crap. Sometimes I open the official YouTube app to check my subscriptions and wonder how anyone uses it. If Google wasn't so ghastly and YouTube Premium had all the features of Revanced I would happily pay for it.

I use the Revanced patched app logged out so Google doesn't decide to ban my account on a whim. Yes, one day I will dump Gmail, its getting closer with the state of things at the moment.

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#122

Post by akramachamarei »

idontwantthis wrote: post #7
sagacity wrote: post #6

It's good to see that many countries are working on lesiglation to protect children and teens against this, since the companies clearly aren't trying.

That’s pretty much the whole purpose of government and if it isn’t doing that then it has abdicated its primary responsibility.

I think many people would disagree with you that the primary responsibility of government is to protect people from themselves.

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#123

Post by akramachamarei »

uniq7 wrote: post #26
sagacity wrote: post #6

It's good to see that many countries are working on lesiglation to protect children and teens against this, since the companies clearly aren't trying.

The problem is when government's solutions go through identifying everyone and collaterally tracking their actions. In the same way parents can be blamed for not keeping their children safe around guns/alcohol/drugs, they should also be blamed for not keeping the children out of digital dangers, and keep mandatory age verifications out of here.

Very shocking that you're being downvoted on HackerNews of all places, where I'd expect people to be tech-literate and aware of the harms of internet age verification law etc.

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#124

Post by idontwantthis »

akramachamarei wrote: post #122
idontwantthis wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s pretty much the whole purpose of government and if it isn’t doing that then it has abdicated its primary responsibility.

I think many people would disagree with you that the primary responsibility of government is to protect people from themselves.

I’m talking about protecting people from evil actors with immense power to do harm.

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#125

Post by mikkupikku »

dylan604 wrote: post #82
mikkupikku wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

American tech corps act like cigarette companies but we're still at the point where banning them for kids is considered weird, fringe and even dangerous. Crazy.

At least they are not running commercials saying 9 out of 10 doctors agree social media is good for you. That's the best thing I can say about them.

Ha, true. But I wouldn't put it past them if it ever gets to the point where they genuinely feel threatened.

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#126

Post by mikkupikku »

reorder9695 wrote: post #69
jmusall wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the possibility of banning certain sites at least for minors is being discussed, after Australia set the precedent. But this of course has downsides, too, as some form of verification has to be implemented, that would almost certainly reduce anonymity and carry risks to personal data protection. A complete ban is unrealistic since people actually like to use these platforms. Plus, it would certainly entail ma…

Does that outweigh the loss of privacy involved? I really don't think it does personally, I should not have to show anyone ID to have an Instagram account, privacy and anonymity is a feature not a bug.

The privacy issue is one of the reasons I favor a total ban.

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#127

Post by red-iron-pine »

dylan604 wrote: post #82
mikkupikku wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

American tech corps act like cigarette companies but we're still at the point where banning them for kids is considered weird, fringe and even dangerous. Crazy.

At least they are not running commercials saying 9 out of 10 doctors agree social media is good for you. That's the best thing I can say about them.

if social media trends * related data suggested it would work they'd totally do it

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#128

Post by mikkupikku »

akramachamarei wrote: post #123
uniq7 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is when government's solutions go through identifying everyone and collaterally tracking their actions. In the same way parents can be blamed for not keeping their children safe around guns/alcohol/drugs, they should also be blamed for not keeping the children out of digital dangers, and keep mandatory age verifications out of here.

Very shocking that you're being downvoted on HackerNews of all places, where I'd expect people to be tech-literate and aware of the harms of internet age verification law etc.

I downvoted it because he invoked the analogy of alcohol and tobacco while simultaneously arguing that it should be totally on the parents. That's not how it's done for alcohol and tobacco! If that were true then any shop could sell booze and cigs to kids, and if that were the case then how could parents possibly hope to stop it?

The premise that parenting is wholly on the parents and society at large doesn't need to play any role in raising kids is a manifestation of the kind of libertarianism that appeals to techies on the spectrum who want to find the simplest possible ruleset for everything, but it just doesn't work that way in reality.

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#129

Post by akramachamarei »

This is an interesting, valuable article. It should definitely be shared widely, especially with parents and teachers. I would love to see ISPs (including cell carriers) sell content control mechanisms to customers so parents and teachers can control at the internet service level how much social media their children and students use. I am also interested in open source/independent/small time developers who would seem highly motivated to make blocking tools and plugins for home routers and the like. There's a broad world of possibilities here.

That said, I am deeply disturbed by the authoritarians in these comments. Government enforced internet age verification is a really really bad idea. I don't want the internet put in a straitjacket. I am eager to hear if someone can explain how these numerously proposed legislations can be done without seriously diminishing the freedom to be anonymous and private on the internet.

Re: Unsealed court documents show teen addiction was big tech's "top priority"

#130

Post by red-iron-pine »

reaperducer wrote: post #34
shimman wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must have been a child when Michelle Obama said that children needed better food and half the country lost their collective minds. Hard to do anything when corporations control what most legislation is passed.

I've always wondered if her initiative, which caused some big food companies to reduce fat and salt in their products, and change their frying media, is the reason for the rise of Sriracha in America. My theory is that the food tasted less flavorful, so people compensated by adding their own. I don't eat a lot of junk food, but for a long time after the Obama administration, when I did partake, often my immediate rea…

sriracha has a ton of sugar in it, ditto for things like ketchup.

in all likelihood it's just enshittification, as those big corps make more slop for the plebs to eat in the cheapest way possible

Post reply on HN