Live data from Hacker News

Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

apnews.com

271–280 of 453 posts

Re: Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

#271
I don't know if that can be implemented, but to me it seems the main problem is the algorithmic feed. I think I would be okay with kids having access to social media, but only if they can't get personalized feed, but can see their friends and maybe specific topics.

Re: Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Bans like this" include drinking age, driving age, military service age, consensual sex age, R rated movie age, etc. To which, I assume, the same question applies?

Generally those don't have population wide, negative impacts (except maybe drinking). I would compare it more to smoking which is considered a public health issue and we regulated smoking out of the market through a combination of safety regulations, limitations on marketing etc. Age bans were part of that but the ID checking requirements there were substantially less risky due to little no risks of retention.

Your initial comment may not have been well stated.

It asserts that underage bans are usually applied to things that are unhealthy for all.

You follow that by stating that provided examples of underage bans are things that are not things with negative impacts on populations.

I'd suggest that real world examples exist of adolecsent alcohol induced brain damage, drivers 10-16 having higher rates of accidents causing death and injury, child soldiers having a negative impact on society, industrial scale under age sex in Christian Brother homes having bad outcomes, early exposure to excessive porn being cited as causing brain rot and social malfunction, etc.

As for:

> we regulated smoking out of the market through a combination of safety regulations, limitations on marketing etc.

I'd point to Australia that started down that path with good results, and continued further only to regulate tobacco out of "regular" markets into the embrace of black markets that come with worse problems than the older established markets that "had a code" (established criminals rarely went after family or indiscriminately acted such that bystanders were killed or injured).

You raise interesting questions that deserve deeper thought and consideration.

Re: Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

#273

I don't know if that can be implemented, but to me it seems the main problem is the algorithmic feed. I think I would be okay with kids having access to social media, but only if they can't get personalized feed, but can see their friends and maybe specific topics.

But those "friends" can also be bullies, etc.

Re: Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

#274

I don't know if that can be implemented, but to me it seems the main problem is the algorithmic feed. I think I would be okay with kids having access to social media, but only if they can't get personalized feed, but can see their friends and maybe specific topics.

I think this would be good for kids but also I want that sort of feed as an adult.

Re: Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

#275
Banning personalised ads would solve a lot of the underlying incentives that drives the attention grabbing economy today.

Increasing the age a few years for when young people are allow to make accounts on social media is not going to make a large difference in the big picture of things, and do not address the core problem that is the collection and abuse of massive amounts of personal data.

Upping the age limit a few years is a compromise that big tech can live with. Here in Norway, we've had a 13 year limit for years, but most parents have not cared so far and help their kids register at a much earlier age anyway. This is changing though, as more people realise the downsides of addictive and manipulative apps fighting desperately for our data and attention.

It is frustrating to see how unwilling we are to address the economic incentives that causes the biggest harms.

Re: Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This has to be done carefully because prohibition breeds desire and adults will absolutely try to force the attitude of 35 year olds onto 15 year olds forgetting a lot of life lessons have to be learned through experience and not just told. The interesting tidbit in the case of social media and smart phones is that they are at least partially pushed by the parents (I've seen plenty of examples of parents demand tha…

Some students even wish for a ban to reduce the pressure to keep up with social media. That reminded me of Warren Buffet asking for his kind and to be taxed more.

By "his kind" you mean human beings?

Re: Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

#279
post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very extreme take. I learned to program at age 10. It is an amazing tool for mind development. Had to invent sine and cosine tables to make my computer games, before even encountering the concept at school.

same and about the same age. however, completely different times. I thought about this a lot and have safely concluded that if I was 9-10 years old now programming would quickly turn into gaming and doom scrolling and … given a choice now of not being exposed to it at same age or nothing until say HS I would choose the latter

Speaking as someone in their 20s - no, I don't think it's a "completely different time". Just 10 years ago, I first learned programming from scripting languages; SourcePawn from Team Fortress 2, and Lua from Roblox/GMod. Predators, hive minds, and self-destructing behavior from children wasn't suddenly invented or rejuvenated after 2016.

All 3 were a total hotbed of bad influences for a child: Team Fortress had trade pub servers with people doing sprays of literal CP and wearing custom lewd skins to harass users with them - and people with very questionable social skills and intentions huddled up in realtime microphone comms with children, Roblox's predator problem for the last 14+ years (at least that I can attest) is suddenly en vogue now that they're a public company and there's stock shorting to be had, GMod is still the community with the most colorful vocabulary I've ever encountered - plus grooming. And much more.

Indeed, you can (and I did) get burned by these actualities when exposed to such communities in your youth - and it can cost you real money, real time, real idealism/innocence, and real mental health. However, I think being exposed to softwares, systems and games that inspired curiosity and led me toward a path of WANTING to contribute brought me to this software development career and life path, and it would have been much more inaccessible and unknown to me in any other way. And I favorited a comment from another HN user a few days ago that goes in astute depth on why that path can only be organically introduced and self-governed [1].

I referred to these places earlier in my comment as "bad influences". I think the single-most powerful thing a parent can do tasked with this dilemma - especially during an upbringing in systemically hard, uncertain, and turbulent times - is teaching them how to identify, avoid, and confront bad influences. Equipped with that, and knowing how to handle yourself, is of utmost importance.

1 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45718773

Re: Denmark's government aims to ban access to social media for children under 15

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were also moral panics about teenage smoking, cannabis and alcohol. There's three outcomes here, sorted from worst to best - Kid uses social media, which is bad for kid due to social media. - Kid doesn't use social media and everyone else does, which is bad for kid due to ostracism - No kids use social media, which is best for kid because they don't get ostracized. What you're saying here is to just settle for…

This is an overly simplistic, idealistic view of the world that leads to people thinking things like the OP are good and necessary. By recognizing that the world doesn't actually work this way at all—things aren't black and white, they're gray—you come to the conclusion that legislation is the worst way to solve these issues and is totally unnecessary.

> you come to the conclusion that legislation is the worst way to solve these issues and is totally unnecessary.

If you want to argue for that point of view, do so. Put forward actual arguments. Your comment reads as “if you were smart like me, you’d know I’m right”. Which is unfalsifiable and unconvincing.

Post reply on HN