Does anyone with legal credentials care to comment on whether this would be likely to be blocked on a first amendment basis? Fundamentally "social media" does seem to be about an ability to post (communicate/publish) and read messages/content. I know in loose terms that in various contexts rights for minors are abridged (e.g. public schools can punish students for speech), but I don't know how far those are allowed to go.
Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
91–100 of 195 posts
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#92Some folks on HN will hate this idea due to the genetic fallacy, but I think we'll end up feeling about social-media the way we currently feel about smoking: it is something that obviously requires protections for minors.
Well, the idea in the link is total bunk (IMHO), but I agree with you. Social Media's turned out to be something with an ugly side, but Pandora's Box is open now and it's here to stay. I would completely agree that we need some protections for minors. Hell - some protections for all of us! I just have no real, viable, solutions come to mind.
smoking was out of the box too, and we did something about that
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
In China, social media is regulated and enforces that children be shown content that is generally related to STEM or other achievements. No stupid dance videos, no memes, no stupid trends - it's "check out this algorithm I wrote!" Many of the top-trending videos on TikTok would actually be banned. Is it malicious? I think so, though not everyone agrees, but the outcome is the same both ways: I would say it is indoctr…
And here I thought it was all a conspiracy to infect American teens with imaginary mental illnesses.
I thought it was an app intended to show users content they might enjoy enough that they might also view ads between content, all in order to make a profit.
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#94> 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…
Show two forms of ID to whom?
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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...
Why do you think people without passports (or uncomfortable uploading government documents to nearly every website they wish to use) should not be allowed to use those websites.
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Quoted post unavailable.
While these jokes are funny, they unfortunately lend credence to people who need to be convinced that their conspiracies are true.
To be clear to anyone else watching this - there is no "indoctrination" going on, only people being exposed to new ideas.
Sorry for taking this overly seriously. It gets tiring dealing with people at least once or twice a week who actually, fully believe this.
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 influen…
> rather, you just support the political views social media is instilling.
People being able to see ideas outside of what their parents and communities see, particularly with respect to human rights (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33924352)?
I suppose I do agree with that.
To be clear - facebook? Trash. Twitter? Trash. Instagram? Trash.
But it is important for people to learn that things they've been told their whole life are not necessarily true, and social media is sometimes the only way for that to happen.
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt I'm going to change your mind on this, but I think you are under-estimating the difficulty of getting ID in certain parts of the country, for certain people. For example, people living on reservations often have difficulty getting ID because the DMV/other agencies are hundreds of miles away, many lack transportation, many lack the necessary documentation required to get the IDs, some states have put legal hur…
No doubt there are some specific people who will have difficulties obtaining identification for no justifiable reason. Such barriers to access should be rectified. However, we are speaking in general rather than specific contrived what-ifs. The vast majority of people have the opportunity to obtain multiple forms of governmental identification that are accessible and affordable.
> No doubt there are some specific people who will have difficulties obtaining identification for no justifiable reason. Such barriers to access should be rectified.
They should be, yet somehow that is never part of the plan in bills that require these IDs. And isn't it curious that the areas where these difficulties are found are almost always correlated with minority demographics? Weird.
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt I'm going to change your mind on this, but I think you are under-estimating the difficulty of getting ID in certain parts of the country, for certain people. For example, people living on reservations often have difficulty getting ID because the DMV/other agencies are hundreds of miles away, many lack transportation, many lack the necessary documentation required to get the IDs, some states have put legal hur…
No doubt there are some specific people who will have difficulties obtaining identification for no justifiable reason. Such barriers to access should be rectified. However, we are speaking in general rather than specific contrived what-ifs. The vast majority of people have the opportunity to obtain multiple forms of governmental identification that are accessible and affordable.
Such barriers should be rectified before making ID mandatory. If the response to that is "well then we'll never be able to implement this!" then one should have a period of deep reflection on why that is and its implications.
When it comes to creating systems whose consequences infringe on rights things like "the vast majority" aren't valid escape hatches. This is doubly true when the folks making the rules have political motivation for disenfranchising the very same group who doesn't have IDs in this case. In fact, when such discrepancies are pointed out and then are instituted anyways, such biases functionally become the point of the institution and increases culpability rather than decreases it.
Re: Bill to ban social media for Texans under 18
#100Earlier 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.
Yikes, really?
And what do they fear the impact of this to be? (Honest question)