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

Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

dallasnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 195 posts

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#61

Post by GoOnThenDoTell »

Dalewyn wrote: post #43
GoOnThenDoTell wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of people only have a SSN card and a birth certificate, as they neither drive (perhaps due to age or preference) or travel by plane (often for financial reasons or preference).

As I said in my other reply, their lack of governmental identification is by choice. Should they choose to not obtain them even if they have the opportunity, then that is their problem.

As I said in my other reply, its too expensive. Are you going to pay for it on their behalf?

Additionally, how are you going to handle undocumented persons.

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#62

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

scifibestfi wrote: post #40
falcolas wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This might not only be about protecting the children. Sadly, it never is about protecting the children. It's always about pushing other agendas that are, at best, tangentially aimed at protecting children. For example, holding back Texan teens (aka Gen Z, who had a huge impact on the recent midterms) from being a part of the broader political discussion; from informing themselves before they're able to vote.

I'm amused by the idea that developing brains in particular are being informed, rather than misinformed, by social media. Where did that come from in the age of misinformation and filter bubbles? Adult brains are misinformed by these bubbles, teenage brains are even more vulnerable.

I don't think it's about correctness, just about whether they're allowed to coordinate as a bloc.

Last year there was a week where the students at the nearby school stole all of the faucet knobs, towel dispensers, and even a mirror from the bathrooms. The following week they went about doing random acts of absurd "public service" (a TV was installed in the bathroom, poorly). Why? Some meme, no greater explanation.

If you maintain an oppressive status quo, that kind of thing scares the bejeezus out of you.

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#63

Post by GoOnThenDoTell »

Dalewyn wrote: post #58
GoOnThenDoTell wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Passports are very expensive though, like hundreds of dollars. They’d have to make them free for this to work

US passports are $130 for both first-time issuance and renewals, though first-time issuance also has a separate $35 fee. Most passports are valid for 10 years. This is hardly expensive. Source: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/passports/forms-fees/Pa...

Thats too costly of a barrier to the legal right to share cat pictures

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#64

Post by gannonburgett »

warbler73 wrote: post #34
neilv wrote: post #6

> A North Texas Republican wants to ban social media for Texans under the age of 18. But wait, there's more: > State Rep. Jared Patterson, R-Frisco, filed House Bill 896 this week that would require social media users to show two forms of photo identification to verify their age. Now all services considered social media would have to collect two forms of photo ID from all users, if they didn't want to be illegal in T…

> This might not only be about protecting the children. When you have verified name and address of every user you can charge a lot more for ads.

Alternatively, those without identification (who are most often marginalized individuals and groups) won't be able to use these platforms with this requirement.

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#65

Post by lukevp »

Dalewyn wrote: post #43
GoOnThenDoTell wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of people only have a SSN card and a birth certificate, as they neither drive (perhaps due to age or preference) or travel by plane (often for financial reasons or preference).

As I said in my other reply, their lack of governmental identification is by choice. Should they choose to not obtain them even if they have the opportunity, then that is their problem.

What about people with disabilities who wouldn’t be able to get a license, and can’t afford / don’t have a way to travel to get ID at the DMV or whatever? Also, do you think Facebook should have more requirements to access than going to a grocery store or taking a bus or any other infrastructure activity you might do? Almost nothing requires double photo IDs, this requirement is ludicrous regardless of if you happen to be privileged enough to have good health and money and time to have multiple photo IDs and it’s not an issue for you personally.

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#66

Post by frob »

Dalewyn wrote: post #30
frob wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...two forms of photo ID... I have one valid photo ID. Most people have only one valid photo ID. How is this supposed to work?

For some governmental (aka official) examples: * State-issued ID card (aka the lesser equivalent to a driver's license card) * Federal-issued passport * Federal-issued passport card (yes, these are a thing) For some informal examples (if they have a photo): * Company ID card/documentation * Library card * Medical card ---- Everyone always has access to a state-issued ID card (or driver's license) and a passport issue…

Not everyone has a passport. It is a lot of work to get one, costs over $100, and can take months to have them delivered.

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#67

Post by hellotomyrars »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #42
falcolas wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This might not only be about protecting the children. Sadly, it never is about protecting the children. It's always about pushing other agendas that are, at best, tangentially aimed at protecting children. For example, holding back Texan teens (aka Gen Z, who had a huge impact on the recent midterms) from being a part of the broader political discussion; from informing themselves before they're able to vote.

Informing themselves, or getting indoctrinated by an app partially owned by the Chinese Communist Party? (When you put it that way, it's an insane idea that we've permitted things to get this far.)

I’ll bite. What is the indoctrination the CCP feeding teens over tiktok?

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#68

Post by Dalewyn »

warbler73 wrote: post #49
Dalewyn wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some governmental (aka official) examples: * State-issued ID card (aka the lesser equivalent to a driver's license card) * Federal-issued passport * Federal-issued passport card (yes, these are a thing) For some informal examples (if they have a photo): * Company ID card/documentation * Library card * Medical card ---- Everyone always has access to a state-issued ID card (or driver's license) and a passport issue…

> Most people satisfy the "two forms of identification" requirement 53% of US adult citizens have a passport as of 11/22. Most of them have a state ID as well. So yes, a bare majority of citizens will be allowed internet access. I have never seen a library card or insurance card with a photo id that is accepted as id at all, much less valid id. Do you have examples and if so how common is this in Texas?

I don't live in Texas, and I did call library cards and the like informal.

Passports are easy to obtain and are not expensive[1] at all. If someone chooses to not obtain them, that's their problem and not mine nor anyone else's.

[1]: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/passports/forms-fees/Pa...

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#69

Post by gjsman-1000 »

Shared404 wrote: post #37
falcolas wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This might not only be about protecting the children. Sadly, it never is about protecting the children. It's always about pushing other agendas that are, at best, tangentially aimed at protecting children. For example, holding back Texan teens (aka Gen Z, who had a huge impact on the recent midterms) from being a part of the broader political discussion; from informing themselves before they're able to vote.

This x1000. I live in TX, and it is many people's greatest fear that their kids might start to think differently than their parents.

This is terrible logic, as when does a corporation performing highly influential campaigns ever have the public interest at heart? In which case, the easiest way to show why this is a bad idea, is imagine if the roles were reversed (i.e. social media was instilling values you didn't agree with and thought were backwards). I don't have to agree with either side to think that allowing a corporation to have such influence over the formation of children is a terrible idea. Especially when said corporations have a long history of scandals (TikTok bowing to CCP, Facebook and Cambridge Analytics, Twitter...)

The only reason I can think of, for why we would be OK with this, is not a principled stance - rather, you just support the political views social media is instilling.

Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18

#70

Post by nsxwolf »

Dalewyn wrote: post #46
0xffff2 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Passports aren't free.

So? Passports aren't expensive either. EDIT: I looked up the fees, it is $130 USD for a passport book, both for first-time issuance (plus separate fee of $35) and renewals. Most passports are valid for 10 years. That is not expensive, and practically free. Source: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/passports/forms-fees/Pa...

That's expensive to most regular people.
Post reply on HN