4 ms·

Glad to see phone bans become more popular. Jonathan Haidt had it on his list of suggestions to parents, to avoid the anxiety generation continuing. He had a lo

Glad to see phone bans become more popular. Jonathan Haidt had it on his list of suggestions to parents, to avoid the anxiety generation continuing. He had a longer list but the four big ones were: No smartphones before high school No social media before 16 No phones in schools More free, independent play

pkphilip 2y ago
All very sensible points. I would add no TV at home till 16
- astrobe_ 2y ago
  You just get hooked to radio and get a weird fetish for voices ;-)
- talldayo 2y ago
  I don't get this. I have very little love for programmed television and news channels these days, but I mostly feel that way because I grew up around them. Reality TV sucks, the news is gruesome, Marvel movies are all the same, HBO just airs different flavors of sex and violence. If you're not exposed to this media and the inherently pulpy context it exists under, you're training your children to treat it as exotic and desirable. You owe it to your next-of-kin to show them the news and global politics in the same way too, lest they fetishize extremism in their late age because they weren't exposed to moderate opinions. On the flip side, I lived in a rural area and my parents would frequently take me to play with kids that had no TV or internet access. Words cannot describe how thick these people can be. One of them was a pair of history buff brothers that weren't allowed to read anything their parents didn't vet - they didn't even know what the Civil War was when I mentioned it. There was a family that lived on a farm, where every time I visited their kids would ask me what weed looks like, what porn was and how alcohol tasted. There were the kids that asked me to recite Newgrounds videos verbatim, explain who "Iron Man" is and even ones that (tragically) didn't know the Mormonism their parents loved was a cult. Rejecting social media is a smart thing to teach anyone, but you have to be extremely careful to not use it as an excuse to shelter them. Sometimes I worry that HN creates a "growth hack" mindset for parents that inhibits them from thinking rationally about how a child develops. It's not a new phenomenon but it seems fear overrides our willingness to empathize with the events of our own childhood. It all feels reminiscent of when people played Mozart for their baby because an unreviewed paper correlated it with higher IQ. Missing the forest for the trees, a bit.
  - pkphilip 2y ago
    There is a lot of evidence showing a direct correlation between TV use and decline in reading skills among children https://www.jstor.org/stable/748102 https://www.jstor.org/stable/748102 https://typeset.io/questions/how-does-television-affect-reading-comprehension-3rpaedjspk https://typeset.io/questions/how-does-television-affect-read... I have noticed this among my children as well. We decided very early on that we won't have a TV at home once the children arrived. They have shown far better reading skills than their peers in school who are glued to the screens. Their peers who have mostly avoided TV also show similarly improved reading skills and also a desire for reading.
- kelnos 2y ago
  While I can understand that some more extreme parents might go for this (I imagine there were some like this even before the internet and smartphones), that seems... well, a bit extreme? Certainly sitting in front of a TV all day is bad for you, but I think policing TV use for a child to ensure it doesn't become a problem is a lot easier than policing smartphone use.
didip 2y ago
No TV and no video game as well before 16?
- seany 2y ago
  We're doing "no internet connected games", which seems like a reasonable balance.
  - tshaddox 2y ago
    Even that’s a little unfortunate, because in my experience the older generation of straightforward competitive multiplayer games can be a productive and mostly safe experience.
    - wincy 2y ago
      Weird my experience as a teenager in the early 2000s was being told how much everyone had carnal relations with my mother on multiplayer games on the internet.
      - philwelch 2y ago
        That’s just socializing with other kids, not being preyed on by an abusive game industry.
        Apocryphon 2y ago
        It was still a form of abuse, just not backed by multimillion corporations. Boys will be boys, but it’s less toxic when it’s in real life with kids you actually know and can see, vs. anonymous strangers over Xbox Live.
        philwelch 2y ago
        Trash talk during competitive games is normal, harmless behavior, not abuse. Boys back then weren’t sheltered and overprotected the way they are now so they could handle it.
ethbr1 2y ago
So essentially, the early 90s? As a kid for part of that time, I have to say my gut reaction is supportive. Three of the most important consequences of your above were (1) creating boredom, (2) promoting independent in-person social interaction, and (3) emphasizing present-ness in the moment. All in ways that are very difficult for children to experience today. Many of my most impressionable and favorite childhood moments came from hanging out with friends, being bored, and getting engrossed in whatever we came up with... ... nowadays at that age, we probably wouldn't even get together and would immediately fire up our consumptive dopamine bricks to banish the first hint of boredom.
tshaddox 2y ago
It’s a little funny that everyone talks about this as a “phone ban” when surely you really only need to ban like 3-4 big tech apps/domains.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > when surely you really only need to ban like 3-4 big tech apps/domains What are you basing this one? (Semantic note: “surely” implies an internally-reasoned versus evidence-based hypothesis. It wasn’t always that way; maybe it’s because of its frequent use in reverse.)
- kelnos 2y ago
  Let's see... Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube... and that's just off the top of my head without thinking. There are more, many more than 3-4. And unless you block the browser (parental controls on mobile are garbage), they're going to get to those sites anyway.
  - tshaddox 2y ago
    Those first three are the same big tech company. But fair enough, it might be a slightly larger handful of services.
Sakos 2y ago
It's extremely weird to me that phones weren't categorically banned in schools until the recent trend. When I went to school in the 90s and early 00s, phones were banned from class, and in some schools I went to, even on campus.
DHPersonal 2y ago
Jonathan Haidt has also been critiqued by his peers [1] for looking at the data with a foregone conclusion instead of getting his conclusion from the data. He's another one of those moral panic peddlers and should not be trusted as a reliable source. [2] 1. https://www.youtube.com/live/Ewxe4pWOH-I https://www.youtube.com/live/Ewxe4pWOH-I 2. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1647639025879064579.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1647639025879064579.html
- WorkerBee28474 2y ago
  You seem to dismiss anyone who claims a "moral panic" while relying on a source that claims multiple moral panics as the issue, such as "the fact that we're living in a late stage capitalist hellscape ... [without a] social safety net...as climate change cooks the world". Furthermore, your backup includes 'X can't be caused by Y because X happened before Y existed'. This ignores that possibility that X can be caused by Y and also caused by something else that existed before Y.
  - DHPersonal 2y ago
    Climate change is real, so it’s not a moral panic. I am not interested in sharing sources about this with you in 2024, because this has already been debated to death in the years prior. If you are not convinced of its existence, then that’s more your concern than mine. Late stage capitalism’s reference is a touchy subject and probably hyperbole in most cases, but it is also a specific reference and does not require the complete abandonment of capitalism to repair the problems. Referring to it does not necessarily equate to a moral panic in my definition of the terms. I do not ignore the possibility you cite; I find the reasoning of it existing prior far more convincing.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  Some things don’t need data for us to take action. This is one of them. You can ignore the problem if it isn’t a big thing for you, but to many adults the reality of the anxious generation is right in front of them. Waiting for drawn out debates is not acceptable to them, and these actions have almost no downsides.

pkphilip 2y ago

All very sensible points. I would add no TV at home till 16

astrobe_ 2y ago
You just get hooked to radio and get a weird fetish for voices ;-)
talldayo 2y ago
I don't get this. I have very little love for programmed television and news channels these days, but I mostly feel that way because I grew up around them. Reality TV sucks, the news is gruesome, Marvel movies are all the same, HBO just airs different flavors of sex and violence. If you're not exposed to this media and the inherently pulpy context it exists under, you're training your children to treat it as exotic and desirable. You owe it to your next-of-kin to show them the news and global politics in the same way too, lest they fetishize extremism in their late age because they weren't exposed to moderate opinions. On the flip side, I lived in a rural area and my parents would frequently take me to play with kids that had no TV or internet access. Words cannot describe how thick these people can be. One of them was a pair of history buff brothers that weren't allowed to read anything their parents didn't vet - they didn't even know what the Civil War was when I mentioned it. There was a family that lived on a farm, where every time I visited their kids would ask me what weed looks like, what porn was and how alcohol tasted. There were the kids that asked me to recite Newgrounds videos verbatim, explain who "Iron Man" is and even ones that (tragically) didn't know the Mormonism their parents loved was a cult. Rejecting social media is a smart thing to teach anyone, but you have to be extremely careful to not use it as an excuse to shelter them. Sometimes I worry that HN creates a "growth hack" mindset for parents that inhibits them from thinking rationally about how a child develops. It's not a new phenomenon but it seems fear overrides our willingness to empathize with the events of our own childhood. It all feels reminiscent of when people played Mozart for their baby because an unreviewed paper correlated it with higher IQ. Missing the forest for the trees, a bit.
- pkphilip 2y ago
  There is a lot of evidence showing a direct correlation between TV use and decline in reading skills among children https://www.jstor.org/stable/748102 https://www.jstor.org/stable/748102 https://typeset.io/questions/how-does-television-affect-reading-comprehension-3rpaedjspk https://typeset.io/questions/how-does-television-affect-read... I have noticed this among my children as well. We decided very early on that we won't have a TV at home once the children arrived. They have shown far better reading skills than their peers in school who are glued to the screens. Their peers who have mostly avoided TV also show similarly improved reading skills and also a desire for reading.
kelnos 2y ago
While I can understand that some more extreme parents might go for this (I imagine there were some like this even before the internet and smartphones), that seems... well, a bit extreme? Certainly sitting in front of a TV all day is bad for you, but I think policing TV use for a child to ensure it doesn't become a problem is a lot easier than policing smartphone use.

didip 2y ago

No TV and no video game as well before 16?

seany 2y ago
We're doing "no internet connected games", which seems like a reasonable balance.
- tshaddox 2y ago
  Even that’s a little unfortunate, because in my experience the older generation of straightforward competitive multiplayer games can be a productive and mostly safe experience.
  - wincy 2y ago
    Weird my experience as a teenager in the early 2000s was being told how much everyone had carnal relations with my mother on multiplayer games on the internet.
    - philwelch 2y ago
      That’s just socializing with other kids, not being preyed on by an abusive game industry.
      - Apocryphon 2y ago
        It was still a form of abuse, just not backed by multimillion corporations. Boys will be boys, but it’s less toxic when it’s in real life with kids you actually know and can see, vs. anonymous strangers over Xbox Live.
        philwelch 2y ago
        Trash talk during competitive games is normal, harmless behavior, not abuse. Boys back then weren’t sheltered and overprotected the way they are now so they could handle it.

ethbr1 2y ago

So essentially, the early 90s? As a kid for part of that time, I have to say my gut reaction is supportive. Three of the most important consequences of your above were (1) creating boredom, (2) promoting independent in-person social interaction, and (3) emphasizing present-ness in the moment. All in ways that are very difficult for children to experience today. Many of my most impressionable and favorite childhood moments came from hanging out with friends, being bored, and getting engrossed in whatever we came up with... ... nowadays at that age, we probably wouldn't even get together and would immediately fire up our consumptive dopamine bricks to banish the first hint of boredom.

tshaddox 2y ago

It’s a little funny that everyone talks about this as a “phone ban” when surely you really only need to ban like 3-4 big tech apps/domains.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> when surely you really only need to ban like 3-4 big tech apps/domains What are you basing this one? (Semantic note: “surely” implies an internally-reasoned versus evidence-based hypothesis. It wasn’t always that way; maybe it’s because of its frequent use in reverse.)
kelnos 2y ago
Let's see... Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube... and that's just off the top of my head without thinking. There are more, many more than 3-4. And unless you block the browser (parental controls on mobile are garbage), they're going to get to those sites anyway.
- tshaddox 2y ago
  Those first three are the same big tech company. But fair enough, it might be a slightly larger handful of services.

Sakos 2y ago

It's extremely weird to me that phones weren't categorically banned in schools until the recent trend. When I went to school in the 90s and early 00s, phones were banned from class, and in some schools I went to, even on campus.

DHPersonal 2y ago

Jonathan Haidt has also been critiqued by his peers [1] for looking at the data with a foregone conclusion instead of getting his conclusion from the data. He's another one of those moral panic peddlers and should not be trusted as a reliable source. [2] 1. https://www.youtube.com/live/Ewxe4pWOH-I https://www.youtube.com/live/Ewxe4pWOH-I 2. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1647639025879064579.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1647639025879064579.html

WorkerBee28474 2y ago
You seem to dismiss anyone who claims a "moral panic" while relying on a source that claims multiple moral panics as the issue, such as "the fact that we're living in a late stage capitalist hellscape ... [without a] social safety net...as climate change cooks the world". Furthermore, your backup includes 'X can't be caused by Y because X happened before Y existed'. This ignores that possibility that X can be caused by Y and also caused by something else that existed before Y.
- DHPersonal 2y ago
  Climate change is real, so it’s not a moral panic. I am not interested in sharing sources about this with you in 2024, because this has already been debated to death in the years prior. If you are not convinced of its existence, then that’s more your concern than mine. Late stage capitalism’s reference is a touchy subject and probably hyperbole in most cases, but it is also a specific reference and does not require the complete abandonment of capitalism to repair the problems. Referring to it does not necessarily equate to a moral panic in my definition of the terms. I do not ignore the possibility you cite; I find the reasoning of it existing prior far more convincing.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Some things don’t need data for us to take action. This is one of them. You can ignore the problem if it isn’t a big thing for you, but to many adults the reality of the anxious generation is right in front of them. Waiting for drawn out debates is not acceptable to them, and these actions have almost no downsides.