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

Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

yle.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 593 posts

Re: Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

#61

Post by bluescrn »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56
bamboozled wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What major revolutions or important political shifts have occurred from people anonymously shitposting on Reddit or Facebook ?

None. Almost by definition, the folks who satisfy themselves waxing online drive complacency away from real action. That doesn’t, however, mean they aren’t self-importantly organized to later support an organized movement.

Do you think the current anti-ICE movement would have happened without social media? Or Jan 6th, or all the Palestine protests, or even the election of Trump?

The US has it's first amendment protections, but other countries seem rather more willing to crack down on online speech.

Re: Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

#62

Post by kuerbel »

mjevans wrote: post #6

I'm fine with this, as long as they DO NOT require any form of ID or 'age' verification. Instead this should be attacked from the profit side, by banning any form of advertising which might target children. If there's no profit to be made in servicing said demographic and a law requesting at least end user 'agreement' that they are an adult, this should be sufficient.

Instead of banning social media for teenagers, regulate it in ways that actively reduce addictive design.

For example: after 15 minutes of short-form content, show an unskippable timer every third video, displaying today’s, this week’s, and total watch time. The same principle should apply to endless scrolling, make usage visible and interruptible.

Base it on actual screen time. This would protect teenagers and benefit adults.

Re: Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

#63

Post by Noaidi »

pfdietz wrote: post #49
athrowaway3z wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very critical of all the schemes proposed but this is just a fundamental misconception on your part. > If there was a legitimate drive to protect kids from the worst of the Internet As with any disease, the impact heavily depends on virality. The worst the internet has to offer to children, is not the gore or porn for the few that look for it (usually individually). The worst it does to children is the attention…

"But think of the children" has always been the go-to excuse for tossing freedom out the window.

So in this case, do we just stop thinking about the children in totality?

Re: Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

#66

Post by haght »

digiown wrote: post #29
bluescrn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO the main point of these schemes is to make it hard for adults to use social media somewhat-anonyously. So the government can more easily identify those posting 'prohibited speech'. If there was a legitimate drive to protect kids from the worst of the Internet, there'd have been more of a crackdown on porn, gore, etc long before social media became such a big problem. And smartphones would have never been allowed…

You already basically can't use most mainstream platforms anonymously. Try registering a Facebook without a phone number (you need to give a passport to get one in most of Europe).

in my country you don't have to give a phone number to register a social media website when i was a kid, i always laughed at my internet friends from a neighbouring country, because they had to give their id to get one, which is very intrusive from the government turns out i was the odd one, as most of the world required an id from you

Re: Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

#67

Post by Aerbil313 »

bobthepanda wrote: post #22
joe_mamba wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Who decides whether an ad is targeting children or not? Much simpler than that, you just ban all targeted ads full stop end of story. The ad-funded internet existed in the 90s before ad targeting was a thing. You went on a car forum, you'd get ads about car parts. You went on a PC forum, you'd get ads about PC parts. Pretty simple stuff that didn't need to know your age, gender, political affiliation, ovulation stat…

Ads and media are generally exploitative and manipulative, even if not targeted specifically at anybody. 3 years after the nation of Fiji received its first television broadcasts in 1995, dieting and disordered eating went from unheard of to double digit percentages among teenage girls. https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/20/world/study-finds-tv-alte... > Before 1995, Dr. Becker said, there was little talk of dieting in…

People will comment all day on the ethics and legality of advertising yet they never seem to stop and think how ads even work. Ads work primarily through increasing the subconscious familiarity over a competitor product’s subconscious familiarity. The vast majority of ads are meant to influence you through completely unconscious processes. The “get to know a product you didn’t know about before” part likely doesn’t even account for %1 of advertising. If the reverse was true, you would never see a single ad of Coca-Cola since everybody on the planet knows about it already.

It boggles my mind to no end that today’s society collectively accepts literally being manipulated against their free will. See the post https://hackernoon.com/nobody-is-immune-to-ads-7142a4245c2c

Re: Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

#68

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

bluescrn wrote: post #18
digiown wrote: post #11

I secretly wish it would use a verification scheme that's so invasive/annoying, that even adults would stop using it anyway.

IMHO the main point of these schemes is to make it hard for adults to use social media somewhat-anonyously. So the government can more easily identify those posting 'prohibited speech'. If there was a legitimate drive to protect kids from the worst of the Internet, there'd have been more of a crackdown on porn, gore, etc long before social media became such a big problem. And smartphones would have never been allowed…

> If there was a legitimate drive to protect kids from the worst of the Internet, there'd have been more of a crackdown on porn, gore, etc long before social media became such a big problem. And smartphones would have never been allowed in schools.

Where are you from, because all of these things have/are being tried for a long time in the US (and, I'd note, received significant pushback from civil liberty advocates). Heck, TFA itself talks about how this social media ban is coming after a ban on phones in schools.

Re: Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

#69

Post by yoz-y »

mjevans wrote: post #6

I'm fine with this, as long as they DO NOT require any form of ID or 'age' verification. Instead this should be attacked from the profit side, by banning any form of advertising which might target children. If there's no profit to be made in servicing said demographic and a law requesting at least end user 'agreement' that they are an adult, this should be sufficient.

There is still a financial incentive to loop in teenagers that would stay on a platform and spend money there later.

Re: Finland looks to introduce Australia-style ban on social media

#70

Post by salawat »

dyauspitr wrote: post #24
mjevans wrote: post #6

I'm fine with this, as long as they DO NOT require any form of ID or 'age' verification. Instead this should be attacked from the profit side, by banning any form of advertising which might target children. If there's no profit to be made in servicing said demographic and a law requesting at least end user 'agreement' that they are an adult, this should be sufficient.

I disagree, we should have age verification but maybe it can be done in a mostly anonymous way like a central arbiter of identity from the government or something.

That's exactly the opposite of anonymous. You cannot have anonymity & age verification that actually guarantees anything. It's a contradiction. Either the chain exists, or it doesn't.
Post reply on HN