Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services • Hacker News Board

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#161

Post by javagram » Thu, May 12, 2022, 12:34 PM UTC

smokey_circles wrote: post #157

encoderer wrote: post #33

Two things are true: 1. this bill is trash, it couldn’t be enforced, it’s pandering. 2. Social media as it has existed for the last 5-10 years is harmful for teenagers. Instagram is making teens depressed and suicidal. TikTok videos have people celebrating mental illness like Tourette’s and has brainwashed impressionable kids into believing they too have tics or multiple personalities or Tourette’s. Something needs t…

Oh yeah. It's Facebook that causes kids to become depressed or attempt suicide. Nevermind the student loan debt crisis, the floundering economy or the authoritarianism sneaking in. Definitely social media. Spoken like the disconnected politicians creating these laws. Hilariously off the mark. Social media is as dangerous for kids as video games. There's an argument to be made for advertising but I sense that is far b…

High school teens don’t have a student loan debt crisis. The economy has been going gangbusters from 2008 to 2022. “Authoritarianism” predominately affecting teens, the most politically disconnected group aside from young children? None of your reasons make more sense than the social media theory (btw, the experience of “authoritarianism” is likely from social media/internet news as other than for some marginalized groups like undocumented immigrants, nothing bad has been happening directly to the majority of teens or their friend groups.)

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#162

Post by Mezzie » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:05 PM UTC

hattmall wrote: post #131

Mezzie wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I have some concerns about this bill and tactic. For example, even if it worked as intended, would we see an uptick of problems in 18 year olds' use of algorithmic social media as they're suddenly away from home/out from under their parents' supervision and given access to a bunch of exploiting content? It's similar to how the first two years of driving are more dangerous regardless of when those 2 years take pl…

The thing is that there's no benefit to algorithmic social media, so erring on the side of caution is responsible. And we see a clear and extremely reasonable threat. The ideal benefit is that teens won't form a social media addiction. Algorithmic social media uses the exact same principles as gambling addictions. Teens are much more subject to these exploitations and we don't let them sit in casinos all day and loot…

I would support efforts at restraining exploitative use of algorithmic content for all ages. The main issue is that age-restricting teens especially is logically difficult and can create unintended consequences. Teens are going to act on their own and since many of today's adults (particularly of the generation that tends to legislate in the US) were not raised in a digital world, there will be groups of teens that are better with technology/computers than the adults making laws and therefore the laws either need to account for that (and requires controls so draconian that companies are likely to just ban the kids or stop operating, which opens up the 'what about lying' issue).

You mention casinos. One difference between casinos/alcohol/cigarettes is that there are easy places to intervene/place responsibility: the point of service is a physical location subject to local law. Digital regulation is a lot murkier and easier to exploit. (And not just by creepy adults: a lot of us kids in the 90s/early 00s picked up on the argument that if we weren't legally able to be held accountable, then we couldn't be legally held accountable for things like piracy either).

The only way to ensure something like this could be enforced would be to require ID for signing up for/into any algorithmic service and HELL no. Not only should we not throw the baby out with the bathwater, we also shouldn't set the cradle on fire.

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#163

Post by Mezzie » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:20 PM UTC

danShumway wrote: post #135

Mezzie wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I have some concerns about this bill and tactic. For example, even if it worked as intended, would we see an uptick of problems in 18 year olds' use of algorithmic social media as they're suddenly away from home/out from under their parents' supervision and given access to a bunch of exploiting content? It's similar to how the first two years of driving are more dangerous regardless of when those 2 years take pl…

> 1.) They lie, so either that's going to be commonly known/accepted OR a giant millstone around the neck of any existing company. You hint at an under-mentioned point here: we want laws that encourage companies to be aware of their users and to protect them, and an unintended consequence of laws that say, "you can continue operating as normal as long as you don't know any of your users are kids" is that companies he…

> But even though it's better than hooking up ID verification to social networks, "pretend teenagers don't use the Internet" isn't harmless policy, it's not just that there are popups people click through.

Related to that, we can't just pretend teenagers have no ability or agency. Honestly, it's a toss up who would 'win' a cat and mouse game between the MN legislature and a group of teens with programming capability. Adolescents are in a developmental stage where they're establishing themselves as individuals away from their parents/adult authorities; it's natural that they're going to seek out spaces that either their parents don't know about or don't want them going to. Our job as adults is to make sure that process is safe for them while still allowing them the autonomy to learn to make good decisions.

> I vaguely wonder if the result of these crackdowns isn't often to make social sites more dangerous for kids.

I wonder this too. I was a very digital kid back in the day before there were regulations against it, and there were opportunity costs to kicking out the under-13s that would be very magnified for 13-to-18s.

It prevents kids from having their own social structures and spaces. For example, 7-10 year old me ran a curatorial site for the Geocities' kids neighborhood and late elementary school me also had an IRC channel. It seems bonkers, but there were advantages: Since I/some of the other kids could run things ourselves (with some adult help from trusted adults), it kept creepy adults from integrating themselves into the group by providing resources. (Think the stereotypical college kid buying high schoolers booze; if kids can't sign up or learn how things work, then they have to play in adult playgrounds instead of making their own.) It meant I could kick people and that the conversation was age-appropriate (because that was where I talked about kid stuff and how dare you be off-topic in my channel [kids make great dictators]).

Related, having an admin/building group of kids is really helpful as a buffer, especially in the teen years. Lots of teens aren't going to tell their parents much, but they will tell other teens, so having some teens around who know how stuff works and gives advice is helpful.

You can't legislate for teens without remembering that they have agency and will act independently.

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#164

Post by RobertRoberts » Thu, May 12, 2022, 2:18 PM UTC

freemint wrote: post #160

RobertRoberts wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just teach math, reading and science and other non-political skills?

Because then you end up with a society with extreme STEM brain. You will not raise citizens but a politically uneducated servant class in a society vulnerable to extreme fracturing as common frameworks to think about politics were not established. Poltical education has been part of the education for the rulers since forever and since the enlightenment it has been more and more become part of education of everybody.…

What is wrong with just teaching facts about politics instead of beliefs about political positions?

(my education list what not exhaustive)

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#165

Post by idea55 » Thu, May 12, 2022, 2:35 PM UTC

encoderer wrote: post #151

helloworld11 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh please, social media may make teens depressed and suicidal, but so too has life in general for decades or longer. If anything, teens can more easily access social support from certain peers within the framework of social media when they do get into a bad spot. Teenage life has never been easy, but it has also never been easier than it is today. Your notion of social media causing some sort of enormously unique and…

I’ll just say, you are acknowledging that social media does make teens suicidal but you are comparing it to the “many other things” in their lives that make them suicidal. Like what? Pressure to achieve? Being popular? Hormones? Social media is a product like cigarettes it can and probably should be regulated. You can’t mandate everybody to have friends but you can regulate Facebook and TikTok.

No post body was provided.

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#166

Post by brewdad » Thu, May 12, 2022, 3:11 PM UTC

chomp wrote: post #13

>The bill would eliminate minors’ access to any algorithmically generated navigation aids, such as “top content” and “hot items” lists. It would also eliminate home pages that are algorithmically organized, whether personalized to individual users or not, which would be replaced by a list of items presented chronologically (presumably in reverse chronological order if allowed because chronological order prioritizes t…

There goes Google's customized search results. Maybe even any results that attempt to "rank" sites.

Hand-curated search like Yahoo in 1993 shall be the future!

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#167

Post by nybble41 » Thu, May 12, 2022, 3:16 PM UTC

temp8964 wrote: post #94

nybble41 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having this as an option might be nice, though it's more likely to be useless at scale. Having it as the only option sounds like a nightmare: Blink and you'll miss the content you're interested in, with no easy way to get back to it. To actually stay connected and up-to-date you'd have to monitor your feed 24/7, manually filtering through piles of data you don't care about to find the rare gems. And what these busybo…

This sounds like you are following way too many sources.

You can certainly cut down on the number of items to scan through by simply cutting off most of it, but then you'll miss some things you would have been interested in. Even worse, making it difficult to follow a wide variety of sources can only make the filter-bubble effect more pronounced—e.g., those so inclined will still follow Fox News but will be much less likely to see anything from alternative news sources since they would need to opt in to seeing everything those sources post.

The problem is not that the feed is algorithmically filtered. We should use algorithms to automatically gather useful information from a wide variety of sources. The problem is who controls the filters, and whose interests the default algorithms serve.

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#168

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 12, 2022, 4:05 PM UTC

_-david-_ wrote: post #136

veilrap wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this is that Republicans in power today equate things like evolution with Democrat ideals. When facts get labeled as bias it's impossible to remove both from the classroom and still have a functional classroom.

Can you name two Republicans who "equate things like evolution with Democrat ideals"?

[deleted]

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#169

Post by encoderer » Thu, May 12, 2022, 4:50 PM UTC

helloworld11 wrote: post #159

encoderer wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll just say, you are acknowledging that social media does make teens suicidal but you are comparing it to the “many other things” in their lives that make them suicidal. Like what? Pressure to achieve? Being popular? Hormones? Social media is a product like cigarettes it can and probably should be regulated. You can’t mandate everybody to have friends but you can regulate Facebook and TikTok.

Yes, I'm saying that social media can make teens act and feel all sorts of things, and that in doing this, it's sometimes harmful in certain very specific contexts that can't simply be made to disappear through ham-fisted regulations, just like many other things throughout modern history that have been pegged to hysterias about "the children". It can be both dangerous in some contexts, beneficial in others and again,…

Bizarre take.

So unlike every other industry, social media is impervious to regulation?

Maybe the situation doesn’t call for prohibition but harm reduction? Why should parents and society as a whole just have to accept whatever some middle management product director at facebook thinks is right? We truly are not as enslaved to the current state of social media as you make it seem.

Re: Minnesota Wants to Ban Under-18s from User-Generated Content Services

#170

Post by Terry_Roll » Thu, May 12, 2022, 5:48 PM UTC

travv0 wrote: post #153

Terry_Roll wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parents have a lot to answer for. The fact most kids dont have a relationship with their parents or guardians where they can talk to them about anything is highlighted with metadata like you have highlighted. The sophistication of manipulation and control is highly granular in todays world, even a keyboard typing pattern can give away emotion which some can exploit.

> The fact most kids dont have a relationship with their parents or guardians where they can talk to them about anything is highlighted with metadata like you have highlighted. You have a source for that? The statistics you're referring certainly don't say anything at all to back your claim.

Have a look online, but here is one plucked from a search engine ( https://www.highlights.com/about-us/press-room/national-surv... ) again meta data, but there is also a Thomas Pynchon quote to think about, "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.".