Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018) • Hacker News Board

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#201

Post by allannienhuis » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:01 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #127

_630w wrote: post #22

I am also curious about the effect of "private" communication channels for kids. They can be hidden to parents and friends irl but still remain public online. I have seen many groups of depressed teens online without adults or someone with experience in them. They all encourage each other to be more depressed because they all have a similarly sad life. The only perspective that gets shared is that life sucks and it i…

It's almost as if you're implying kids were imprisoned indoors and didn't hang out with other kids out of earshot of their parents.

Yes, kids being bad influences on each other is sort of inherent in letting kids hang out with each other. This is one thing I don't hear much about when people talk about the advantages of 'free-range' parenting. I get that there are some possible character and problem solving advantages for some kids ( the 'stronger' ones ), but kids in groups without supervision have always been a breeding ground for bullies and outrageous peer pressure.

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#202

Post by magicsmoke » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:02 PM UTC

allannienhuis wrote: post #196

jandrese wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finland has a history of needing to fight off a much larger expansionist neighbor. One who has recently (a few years ago) annexed more territory while the rest of the world sat around and did nothing. Or are you asking why they don't extend the mandatory service to women? The reasons for that are somewhat historic and very _biotruth_. A country that fights a devastating war that wipes out 90% of the men but keeps the…

But those aren't the two options. If loss of life were equal due to equal participation, you'd get 45% loss of each sex (using your 90% of men figure as the potential loss), which (while still devastating) isn't the same argument for losing the breeding capacity of the country. The reality is that those sorts of rules are very much based on culture tradition ('historic'). It takes a long time for parts of our culture…

Scenario A: 100 women, 100 men. 100 men go off to war, 10 men return. But with polygamy, 100 women have 100 children for the next generation.

Scenario B: 100 women, 100 men. 50 women and 50 men go off to war, 5 men and 5 women return. You have 55 women left in the population and 55 children for the next generation.

The limiting factor in human population growth is the number of women that can have children. The cold calculus might be distasteful, but it is there.

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#203

Post by quantumwannabe » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:02 PM UTC

_5yps wrote: post #77

mnky9800n wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the second tier of Carnegie Mellon and Cornell. Lol.

Second-tier compared to the world's top universities; that is, Harvard, Stanford, Oxford and their ilk. I've seen posts on this website[0] how some big tech companies almost exclusively skim off the top. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15543371

That's bs. I work for a big tech company, and do interviews for them as well. Most people went either to a state school, a normal university in another country, or a small liberal arts college. Very few big tech employees have degrees from the "elite" class of universities. The same is true for interviews, the vast majority of interviews are not given to the so-called "elite" class, and the new grads I've interviewed from said class are no better or worse on average than people who attended less prestigious schools.

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#204

Post by tomohawk » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:02 PM UTC

_5yps wrote: post #27

16-year-old here. My experience is probably markedly different from most teenagers in the US (I'm an immigrant who goes to a competitive school full of other immigrants) but I find that, for the most part, this article hits the nail on the head. High School is nothing like the usual media portrayal - I've never heard anyone even talk about a party, nobody's doing anything stronger than weed, nobody's fucking or even…

Waiting for the lawyers to launch a class action lawsuit against the smart phone industry.

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#205

Post by Taek » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:04 PM UTC

daptaq wrote: post #195

Taek wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recent studies have been consistent with the result that teenagers are having less sex today than they used to.

Ok, there's been more education on STDs and teen pregnancy, but even still, because of WhatsApp/Facebook messenger, a lot of what used to happen in the hallways (or at least how Hollywood depicts it) can how be "virtually" hidden.

Less than being worried about the 'why', I'm just stating the facts. These studies usually collect information via anonymous surveys, and generally there's reason to believe that these surveys are reliable.

Saying "it just happens virtually now" doesn't change the results of the studies. We aren't measuring by listening to hallway conversations, we are measuring by directly asking teens "are you sexually active?", in a safe, anonymous environment.

http://recapp.etr.org/recapp/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.Stat...

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#206

Post by Veera_Sivarajan » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:05 PM UTC

_5yps wrote: post #40

stareatgoats wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never heard anyone even talk about a party And the stuff about sexual intercourse - really? Such a far cry from my own high school years (in the seventies), I can hardly believe it. Sounds more like the stuff I would try to convince my mother, with mixed success. Otherwise, kudos for such mastery of language at 16.

It's not true that nobody's fucking. The LGBT kids fuck to an extent, as do some of the lower achievers, but even then it's nowhere near as much as I expected. I'm surprised to hear you compliment my writing style. I always thought it was subpar - too many clauses, a slew of unnecessary qualifiers and weasel words, no shortage of kludges for things I can't express very well. I tend to be better at it after I've been…

Mind sharing the title of the book?

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#207

Post by givehimagun » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:08 PM UTC

pier25 wrote: post #199

softwaredoug wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a parent, I've noticed the biggest problem that prevents "free range" kids is other adults without kids. Those of us WITH kids relish getting the kids outside and out of our hair. But those without kids frequently are calling the parents to complain our children are roaming the neighborhood, perhaps on their property. Or they fear these kids will create problems. Usually, however, they're just kids being kids. Goi…

I don't know. In Spain kids are indeed less adventurous than my generation, specially in the cities, but I've never heard about someone complaining about kids roaming. I think the number of alone activities kids can do these days to keep themselves entertained (videogames, internet, netflix, etc) is a much more influential factor.

I agree - as someone without kids in a neighborhood full of kids. In my decade of living in the burbs, I have not seen 2 children playing/going somewhere/interacting without an adult around once. I think most parents don't leave their children unsupervised AND there is a very easy alternative (videogames, internet, netflix, etc - as you mentioned).

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#208

Post by hckr_news » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:09 PM UTC

_jal wrote: post #109

Another vote for the Lead Hypothesis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead–crime_hypothesis

This was my first thought.

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#209

Post by joshgachnang » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:10 PM UTC

user5994461 wrote: post #187

daptaq wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never heard anyone even talk about a party, nobody's doing anything stronger than weed, nobody's fucking or even dating at all. That's easy to explain: You don't have to talk about these things anymore, because of IM & co.. It's all still happening, but it's easier to hide it from the "dweebs". I've seen both sides, and it's really surprising how well this unwritten system works. At best you realize a few year…

The partying portrayed in the media is more representative of student life in universities. There's not much going on in high schools, 15 years old kids living at their parents who can't even buy alcohol.

I think that very much depends on where you grew up. I grew up middle of nowhere Wisconsin and we were definitely drinking and throwing parties (even with parents home) at 15. All it takes is "cool" parents that accept kids are going to drink and want to provide a safe spot for it (especially taking all the car keys), or someone's older brother who will buy the alcohol and drinking after the parents go to sleep.

Re: Teenagers are better behaved and less hedonistic (2018)

#210

Post by allannienhuis » Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 4:10 PM UTC

magicsmoke wrote: post #202

allannienhuis wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But those aren't the two options. If loss of life were equal due to equal participation, you'd get 45% loss of each sex (using your 90% of men figure as the potential loss), which (while still devastating) isn't the same argument for losing the breeding capacity of the country. The reality is that those sorts of rules are very much based on culture tradition ('historic'). It takes a long time for parts of our culture…

Scenario A: 100 women, 100 men. 100 men go off to war, 10 men return. But with polygamy, 100 women have 100 children for the next generation. Scenario B: 100 women, 100 men. 50 women and 50 men go off to war, 5 men and 5 women return. You have 55 women left in the population and 55 children for the next generation. The limiting factor in human population growth is the number of women that can have children. The cold…

by adding polygamy into the mix, you're moving the goalposts of what is really just an intellectual exercise here. The reality is that these sorts of laws are put in place based on what the lawmakers feel is culturally acceptable (tradition). Pretty confident the people arguing for male-only conscription aren't putting much weight on polygamy in their thinking. What they're really thinking is that they need male soldiers to win their war or defend their country...