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

UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

manchestereveningnews.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 302 posts

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#261

Post by penguin_booze »

tarkin2 wrote: post #162

I teach children. You have no idea how much social media has affected their attention, memory, critical reasoning and social skills: the social repercussions will be felt for decades. And this isn't mentioning exposing easily malleable minds to propaganda paid for by states that see the UK as an enemy, all before their critical reasoning skills, and awareness of their emotions, and how their emotions can be used agai…

The other potential good outcomes are that (1) make a dent (however minuscule) into current and future revenue of parasitic american companies (2) a next generation of young people growing up not addicted to social media.

The latter has the same effect of trying to proselytise to a grown, intelligent adult. The response is, quite rightly, yuck.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#262

Post by dindunuf »

Aurornis wrote: post #74
atollk wrote: post #29

I know many people dislike this movement but really, I think it's a good idea. Yes, it removes the "free" internet as it was 20 years ago, but that's gone already anyway. Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access, but arguing against any law to be against that just seems like straight up anarchism to me. I see both children and adults being manipulated by corporations with "algorith…

> but really, I think it's a good idea. > Yes, it removes the "free" internet > Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access Is anyone else as stunned as I am by how many posters on tech websites have suddenly gone full anti-free-internet and embracing the police state? The internet I grew up on was all about freedom and resisting the police state. Now the top voted comment (at least a…

it takes very little effort from those who control the media to turn terminally online cattle for/against anything, because they are almost completely uncritical of their side of the establishment. pander to them 95% of the time, and you can use the remaining 5% to push whatever agenda you like.

among the least controversial things I can give as an example without getting silently downvoted and flagged, would you have ever imagined that particular demographic demanding draconian copyright laws? yet, here we are, copyright is good now.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#263

Post by luke727 »

Aurornis wrote: post #74
atollk wrote: post #29

I know many people dislike this movement but really, I think it's a good idea. Yes, it removes the "free" internet as it was 20 years ago, but that's gone already anyway. Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access, but arguing against any law to be against that just seems like straight up anarchism to me. I see both children and adults being manipulated by corporations with "algorith…

> but really, I think it's a good idea. > Yes, it removes the "free" internet > Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access Is anyone else as stunned as I am by how many posters on tech websites have suddenly gone full anti-free-internet and embracing the police state? The internet I grew up on was all about freedom and resisting the police state. Now the top voted comment (at least a…

> Is anyone else as stunned as I am by how many posters on tech websites have suddenly gone full anti-free-internet and embracing the police state?

I suspect it's because people of our generation (I'm assuming) grew up with similar experiences to ours and had kids, and want to protect them. To be fair it's worse now than when we were growing up; I can't imagine how awful it must be to grow up in the age of social media.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#264

Post by theultdev »

ElProlactin wrote: post #218
theultdev wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until they turn 17, then they get to be id-verified surveilled like the rest of us! Much safe system. Very cozy. Glad kids are safe now. That was close!

So what's your solution? There's substantial evidence for harms on young people that go beyond surveillance, but I guess we now live in a society that embraces throw them to the wolves and see which ones survive ?

The only proper solution always used for children. Parent's discretion.

Other people's kids are not my nor the governments business.

I will restrict social media as I see fit for my children. Don't need a nanny state.

No need for "think of the children". You shouldn't be thinking of my children, they are fine. Worry about yourself and your own kids.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#265

Post by CrimsonCape »

Ultimately, if a kid is super digitally connected and using social media all day, can't his/her final grades be enough evidence?

I'd like to hear some arguments how we must ban certain technology in school; meanwhile it's plain to see to anybody with a brain cell that there is an entire corrupt stack from state government down to the individual classroom that *students must not be given failing grades*.

Here's a thought experiment: provide an opinion to both of these assertions. The rule of the experiment is you cannot give an opinion to one without answering the other.

- We should ban social media in school

- We should ban failing grades in school

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#266

Post by theultdev »

philipallstar wrote: post #227
theultdev wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Riddle me this. If you have to verify yourself to prove you are over 16, did that just deanonymize you? Yes.

Good job I said this, then: > The problem is it requires surveillance.

So it's not "obviously about kids" then.

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#267

Post by NopIdoN »

gadders wrote: post #125
atollk wrote: post #29

I know many people dislike this movement but really, I think it's a good idea. Yes, it removes the "free" internet as it was 20 years ago, but that's gone already anyway. Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access, but arguing against any law to be against that just seems like straight up anarchism to me. I see both children and adults being manipulated by corporations with "algorith…

It's a good idea, as long as this clown show of a government doesn't link it to mandatory digital IDs.

Any reason to think they won't?

Re: UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s

#269

Post by epolanski »

tarkin2 wrote: post #162

I teach children. You have no idea how much social media has affected their attention, memory, critical reasoning and social skills: the social repercussions will be felt for decades. And this isn't mentioning exposing easily malleable minds to propaganda paid for by states that see the UK as an enemy, all before their critical reasoning skills, and awareness of their emotions, and how their emotions can be used agai…

> You have no idea how much social media has affected their attention, memory, critical reasoning and social skills: the social repercussions will be felt for decades.

I don't see different results among my peers (I'm 39) let alone older people.

Seeing my family, it's mostly the 50+ that are consistently distracted by phones, not the Gen Zs.

Post reply on HN