4 ms·

Why would you expect anything of that sort to be without controversy? It's saying that we shouldn't hand our kids over to the tech company babysitters, and the

by Syonyk 3y ago

Why would you expect anything of that sort to be without controversy? It's saying that we shouldn't hand our kids over to the tech company babysitters, and there are quite a few people, paid and unpaid, happy to argue against sort of thing (even on HN, arguing against constant connectivity through smartphones draws quite a bit of hostility). However, it's a book that's squarely in the topic of "Kids and technology," and is built around research that spans through Covid. I'm aware the concept of reading books is rather outdated, but I still try to suggest long form literature on topics that matter, versus some short form articles.

ideashower 3y ago
I can't open the archive link the other person shared, but the controversy as I understand with this book, is that it has more to do with the methodology the author presents. https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2024/03/22/anxious-generation-rewiring-childhood-jonathan-haidt-review/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2024/03/22/anxious-gene...
- Syonyk 3y ago
  And the Washington Post is owned (via a holding company or two) by Jeff Bezos. They're the sort of newspaper that I would expect would be very, very happy to cheerlead for "Everyone on consumer digital tech, all hours of all the days." But even then, the article isn't exactly highly critical of the book. It talks about the fact that there's a lot of correlation to make arguments, without even acknowledging the ever-growing pile of studies demonstrating causation - when you ask groups of teenagers or young adults to go without their social media apps or smartphones for a while, they get better for a while in terms of the sort of mental health metrics that have been going nuts lately. And of course he's writing defensively. There's no shortage of people who will, as you've seen in this discussion, start defending how "people arguing against smartphones" are just "scared of new technology" or such (ignoring that a lot of people who've worked in tech their entire lives and deeply understand the technologies used are some of the leading edge arguing that we shouldn't be using the stuff as we do). In any case, a discussion about the book is certainly an improvement over other options.

by Syonyk 3y ago

ideashower 3y ago

I can't open the archive link the other person shared, but the controversy as I understand with this book, is that it has more to do with the methodology the author presents. https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2024/03/22/anxious-generation-rewiring-childhood-jonathan-haidt-review/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2024/03/22/anxious-gene...

Syonyk 3y ago
And the Washington Post is owned (via a holding company or two) by Jeff Bezos. They're the sort of newspaper that I would expect would be very, very happy to cheerlead for "Everyone on consumer digital tech, all hours of all the days." But even then, the article isn't exactly highly critical of the book. It talks about the fact that there's a lot of correlation to make arguments, without even acknowledging the ever-growing pile of studies demonstrating causation - when you ask groups of teenagers or young adults to go without their social media apps or smartphones for a while, they get better for a while in terms of the sort of mental health metrics that have been going nuts lately. And of course he's writing defensively. There's no shortage of people who will, as you've seen in this discussion, start defending how "people arguing against smartphones" are just "scared of new technology" or such (ignoring that a lot of people who've worked in tech their entire lives and deeply understand the technologies used are some of the leading edge arguing that we shouldn't be using the stuff as we do). In any case, a discussion about the book is certainly an improvement over other options.