Seems like the thing to do is just ban phones in schools. The authority is already there and you can see what affect it has.
Banned in my kids' school. Not for their benefit, but for the teachers.
The case for banning children from social media
481–490 of 593 posts
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#482Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't require a ban, it requires parents to be actively involved in their children's lives and to make the decision for how they want to raise their own kids.
Let's make Heroin, prostitution and assault rifles legal to under age kids, because after all if you are a good parent then you can be sure that your child will certainly not get access to those things via their friends or other avenues. Why have rules, laws or bans (just a form of law) for anything anywhere. All evil things in this world are just a matter of parenting. Gosh, you're so fecking clever how come nobody…
Indeed, social interaction is, generally, addictive. But if you ban the kids from HN they aren't apt to give up social interaction cold turkey, they'll go interact with the neighbours instead to get their fix.
Is that actually a win? Emotionally, I can see why some hang onto the idea of talking face to face just like in the good old days, but at the same time you are trading for greatly reduced access to the world's most interesting people. The whole reason we're here and not talking to our neighbours is because we can seek out people of significance, not just who happens to move in next door.
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#483Tangent, but I’m at an age where many of my friends are having kids and are sharing a huge amount of their children’s lives on social media. Not my business, but I can’t help but wonder what these kids will think once they become of age and realize their entire childhood has been plastered online on Instagram. My wife and I have decided if we ever have kid, we’re never going to post a single publically viewable photo…
..their friends will take photos.
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#484Maybe we just ban kids from smart phones. Or ban social media apps on phones operated by minors.
Educate the kids?
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#485Earlier quoted context omitted.
18.. hell I’m close to 40 and I have trouble self regulating. YouTube needs an option to disable shorts. It’s just not healthy. TikTok I won’t even touch it. It’s virtualized crack.
Install a userscripts extension in your browser and with that install a userscript such as Focused YouTube [1]. I did and never looked back! I want nothing to do with TikTok or YouTube shorts. I watch long-form videos on science, math, and engineering topics for the most part. [1] https://github.com/KervynH/Focused-YouTube
Does this work for mobile?
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren't there already legal definitins for adverts? They're regulated today. Edit: In the UK advertising regulations are handled by the Advertising Standards Authority who already have rules specific to advertising to children. https://www.gov.uk/marketing-advertising-law/advertising-cod...
Problem with the ASA is that they can only react to advertising that's out there and by the time they do, the campaign is usually done.
I didn't mean to suggest the issues were already solved, only that there's already precedent for defining advertising in law as well as regulating adverts aimed at children.
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#487Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another problem is the definition of "ad". Is kid playing with fancy toys is an ad? Is product placement in movie an ad? How and who will determine if this is and ad or not?
Anytime someone exchanges cash, goods, or services to promote a product or service, and then repeat this inspection up the chain of shell companies! > Is kid playing with fancy toys is an ad? not enough context, maybe > Is product placement in movie an ad? yes, clearly > How and who will determine if this is and ad or not? Probably some corporate compliance drones and underfunded government stooges.
> not enough context, maybe
> Probably some corporate compliance drones and underfunded government stooges.
Youtube alone has 720,000 hours of fresh video content per day Tiktok must have less number of hours but more Videos per day. Add Instagram, facebook, Twitter and it's impossible for anyone to verify this manually so in the end how is the platform supposed to decide what to show and what not where the "not enough context, maybe" is the most common answer?
> Is product placement in movie an ad? > yes, clearly
not so clearly even in this case. see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-x8DYTOv7w, a very nice recap of what an ad is.
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#488Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a parent, I say that no amount of parental empowerment can compensate for a culture that seems broadly unaware that there is even a problem. Sure, better age / times restriction tools (especially ones that unify over all device types) would help. But in the end the kids can just get their own devices and a mobile plan with data and that ends your empowerment unless you want to turn your house into North Korea. No…
I'm a parent. I don't agree with you. My sons are now adults but had substantial internet access from a very early age. They got a "safe list" of kid-friendly links plus some local software just for them. They weren't required to stick to those kid-friendly links. It was just to make it easier for them to cope. One son was so young, he figured out how to roll the ball under the mouse with this thumb because it was to…
Well you know regulating kids social media use is not going to make it harder for you.
Controversial but frankly just say no to Drugs campaign of 90s was probably more beneficial until I was old enough to understand the nuance around drug use and could make my own decisions
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's make Heroin, prostitution and assault rifles legal to under age kids, because after all if you are a good parent then you can be sure that your child will certainly not get access to those things via their friends or other avenues. Why have rules, laws or bans (just a form of law) for anything anywhere. All evil things in this world are just a matter of parenting. Gosh, you're so fecking clever how come nobody…
Indeed, social interaction is, generally, addictive. But if you ban the kids from HN they aren't apt to give up social interaction cold turkey, they'll go interact with the neighbours instead to get their fix. Is that actually a win? Emotionally, I can see why some hang onto the idea of talking face to face just like in the good old days, but at the same time you are trading for greatly reduced access to the world's…
I don't think HN falls into the category of social media in the sense that it is debated by lawmakers at the moment. Not every online community is social media just like not every shopping site that has girls posing in tight bikinis (Victoria Secret, Nike, etc.) is an adult site.
Re: The case for banning children from social media
#490First thing I read all day that makes any sense.