5 ms·

Banning <16 year olds from social media is for their protection. Banning >60 from social media (and I’d add voting) is for everyone else’s protection.

by isodev 2y ago

cyanwave 2y ago
Damn ageism. There’s some amazing 60yo assembly devs out there.
- BLKNSLVR 2y ago
  And society wants them dev'ing amazingly in assembly, not doomscrolling!
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    I could say that for all ages. Having known the world pre-social media I really do wish we could go back.
    - NavinF 2y ago
      There's nothing keeping you here on a social media website. Dunno why you wanna control what others do with their time
      - DavidPiper 2y ago
        Seems like a strawman, I can think of plenty of reasons people want to control others' time. It's the literal job of every CEO for starters.
        pests 2y ago
        What happened to Liberty? The CEO is not controlling their time, he's buying it and they're selling it. What other reasons do you have?
        NavinF 2y ago
        No CEO controls my time. What are you on about?
        pests 2y ago
        > I can think of plenty of reasons people want to control others' time So can I - They want to control people like property - They want to impose their views and values - They don't want any competition - They have a power trip - They want to use others time for their own benefit What else am I missing?
      - lukan 2y ago
        "There's nothing keeping you here on a social media website." The people for instance, when everyone is on social media, you won't find people in the streets anymore, except for the homeless and junkies. (but luckily it is still possible to find people in the real world, but it did became hard to find real undistracted people)
      - phs318u 2y ago
        > There's nothing keeping you here on a social media website There’s nothing keeping you here in a casino, gambling your wages away. There’s nothing keeping you here in a bar drinking yourself to oblivion. There’s nothing keeping you here smoking three packs a day until you’re shitting tar. The age old advice to “just stop” doesn’t quite work for those most at risk. Harm minimisation is a reasonable thing. We don’t think it’s a good idea for young kids to smoke, drink, drive, vote or have sex. Since we know that social media can be specifically harmful to the youngest demographic, why wouldn’t we want to regulate it based on age?
        NavinF 2y ago
        > Since we know that social media can be specifically harmful to the youngest demographic Who is this "we" that accepts that uncritically? I've been on "social media" since I was 8yo and my little brother has been on social media since he was a baby. Now he's becoming a doctor. He grew up with the 1st gen iPhone which was released 17 years ago. FWIW I think the drinking age of 21 in the US is kinda silly. Many Americans start driving at 14 (with employment letter) or at 15.5 and many Americans buy their first rifle at 18 years old.
        phs318u 2y ago
        Who’s being uncritical here? I’m not an alcoholic and neither is my sister. That doesn’t mean alcoholism doesn’t exist nor that there aren’t very real harms to a small subset of the population. Great enough harm (that also impacts on non-alcoholics), that we’ve collectively decided to regulate an otherwise legal substance. Would you suggest that we shouldn’t age-limit alcohol? And even with the things you quote - driving and gun ownership - there’s still an age limit, not no age limit. The specific number is irrelevant and up for discussion, but we’ve still decided for those things that there exists a “too young” category. EDITED to remove a stupid phone autocorrection/autoinsertion.
      - cjbgkagh 2y ago
        EDIT: I should point out that in general what happens to other people does impact me so I do have a stake in the behavior of others. No man is an island. I’m not a social media addict, I only use HN occasionally and really only to remind myself what other people are like. Without this I would forget and assume things about people that are just not true. I treat social media like the dangerous drug that it is and intentionally limit my exposure. But not everyone can do that. I personally know many people who have let social media ruin their lives and their minds to the point I’m not even sure they are rehabilitatable. I wasn’t proposing a ban, I don’t trust the government with that much power and regulation would be difficult- at what point does a social club become social media. I guess my appeal to time travel did not properly reflect this perceived futility. I think the only way would be as an Amish like intentional community with a religious level of enforcement. E.g. You can use social media but only in the shed, not in the house. But that’s not realistic so I just have to accept that X% of the population are not going to make it unscathed. These people will become a burden on the state at a time when the state is increasingly reaching to voluntary euthanasia for solutions. Perhaps in time people will socially and genetically evolve in ways that’ll be able to deal with it.
    - EasyMark 2y ago
      I think ageism is one of the last safe hold outs for those who like to participate in "isms" outside their echo chambers.
      - cjbgkagh 2y ago
        I’m against protected class laws and I am for accepting reality and making public policy based on that reality. It is just my view that social media is unhealthy at any age.
kortilla 2y ago
I think there is a better argument for banning anyone under the age of 30 from voting than there is for anything as low as a limit of 60 for voting.
- robinei 2y ago
  On the flip side, it seems evident that younger people tend to vote for the betterment of all, while older people tend to shift toward voting for «themselves».
  - akkad33 2y ago
    Why is that evident? Any evidence for it?
    - robinei 2y ago
      I’m talking of the typical left/right split. Where leftist policies tend toward redistribution of wealth to the benefit of broader swathes, while right oriented policies tend to at least lead to more concentration of wealth. Maybe it is an outdated bias, but until now at least my impression is that young people have had a greater tendency toward some form of humanistic idealism.
      - akkad33 2y ago
        That's the traditional stereotype, but I have a hard time believing those whose internet presence is mostly manifested as Twitter stan wars and tiktok trends care about greater ideals than the next viral trend
      - a-french-anon 2y ago
        >I’m talking of the typical left/right split. Where leftist policies tend toward redistribution of wealth to the benefit of broader swathes Broader swathes which they're part of. This is just the millennia old has and has-nots, don't fall for wishful thinking this base.
      - 2y ago
sureIy 2y ago
This is akin to speed limits. Doing 50 km/h on a 20 km/h street isn't going to kill you, but can kill people outside your vehicle.

Banning <16 year olds from social media is for their protection. Banning >60 from social media (and I’d add voting) is for everyone else’s protection.

by isodev 2y ago

Banning <16 year olds from social media is for their protection. Banning >60 from social media (and I’d add voting) is for everyone else’s protection.

cyanwave 2y ago

Damn ageism. There’s some amazing 60yo assembly devs out there.

BLKNSLVR 2y ago
And society wants them dev'ing amazingly in assembly, not doomscrolling!
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  I could say that for all ages. Having known the world pre-social media I really do wish we could go back.
  - NavinF 2y ago
    There's nothing keeping you here on a social media website. Dunno why you wanna control what others do with their time
    - DavidPiper 2y ago
      Seems like a strawman, I can think of plenty of reasons people want to control others' time. It's the literal job of every CEO for starters.
      - pests 2y ago
        What happened to Liberty? The CEO is not controlling their time, he's buying it and they're selling it. What other reasons do you have?
      - NavinF 2y ago
        No CEO controls my time. What are you on about?
      - pests 2y ago
        > I can think of plenty of reasons people want to control others' time So can I - They want to control people like property - They want to impose their views and values - They don't want any competition - They have a power trip - They want to use others time for their own benefit What else am I missing?
    - lukan 2y ago
      "There's nothing keeping you here on a social media website." The people for instance, when everyone is on social media, you won't find people in the streets anymore, except for the homeless and junkies. (but luckily it is still possible to find people in the real world, but it did became hard to find real undistracted people)
    - phs318u 2y ago
      > There's nothing keeping you here on a social media website There’s nothing keeping you here in a casino, gambling your wages away. There’s nothing keeping you here in a bar drinking yourself to oblivion. There’s nothing keeping you here smoking three packs a day until you’re shitting tar. The age old advice to “just stop” doesn’t quite work for those most at risk. Harm minimisation is a reasonable thing. We don’t think it’s a good idea for young kids to smoke, drink, drive, vote or have sex. Since we know that social media can be specifically harmful to the youngest demographic, why wouldn’t we want to regulate it based on age?
      - NavinF 2y ago
        > Since we know that social media can be specifically harmful to the youngest demographic Who is this "we" that accepts that uncritically? I've been on "social media" since I was 8yo and my little brother has been on social media since he was a baby. Now he's becoming a doctor. He grew up with the 1st gen iPhone which was released 17 years ago. FWIW I think the drinking age of 21 in the US is kinda silly. Many Americans start driving at 14 (with employment letter) or at 15.5 and many Americans buy their first rifle at 18 years old.
        phs318u 2y ago
        Who’s being uncritical here? I’m not an alcoholic and neither is my sister. That doesn’t mean alcoholism doesn’t exist nor that there aren’t very real harms to a small subset of the population. Great enough harm (that also impacts on non-alcoholics), that we’ve collectively decided to regulate an otherwise legal substance. Would you suggest that we shouldn’t age-limit alcohol? And even with the things you quote - driving and gun ownership - there’s still an age limit, not no age limit. The specific number is irrelevant and up for discussion, but we’ve still decided for those things that there exists a “too young” category. EDITED to remove a stupid phone autocorrection/autoinsertion.
    - cjbgkagh 2y ago
      EDIT: I should point out that in general what happens to other people does impact me so I do have a stake in the behavior of others. No man is an island. I’m not a social media addict, I only use HN occasionally and really only to remind myself what other people are like. Without this I would forget and assume things about people that are just not true. I treat social media like the dangerous drug that it is and intentionally limit my exposure. But not everyone can do that. I personally know many people who have let social media ruin their lives and their minds to the point I’m not even sure they are rehabilitatable. I wasn’t proposing a ban, I don’t trust the government with that much power and regulation would be difficult- at what point does a social club become social media. I guess my appeal to time travel did not properly reflect this perceived futility. I think the only way would be as an Amish like intentional community with a religious level of enforcement. E.g. You can use social media but only in the shed, not in the house. But that’s not realistic so I just have to accept that X% of the population are not going to make it unscathed. These people will become a burden on the state at a time when the state is increasingly reaching to voluntary euthanasia for solutions. Perhaps in time people will socially and genetically evolve in ways that’ll be able to deal with it.
  - EasyMark 2y ago
    I think ageism is one of the last safe hold outs for those who like to participate in "isms" outside their echo chambers.
    - cjbgkagh 2y ago
      I’m against protected class laws and I am for accepting reality and making public policy based on that reality. It is just my view that social media is unhealthy at any age.

kortilla 2y ago

I think there is a better argument for banning anyone under the age of 30 from voting than there is for anything as low as a limit of 60 for voting.

robinei 2y ago
On the flip side, it seems evident that younger people tend to vote for the betterment of all, while older people tend to shift toward voting for «themselves».
- akkad33 2y ago
  Why is that evident? Any evidence for it?
  - robinei 2y ago
    I’m talking of the typical left/right split. Where leftist policies tend toward redistribution of wealth to the benefit of broader swathes, while right oriented policies tend to at least lead to more concentration of wealth. Maybe it is an outdated bias, but until now at least my impression is that young people have had a greater tendency toward some form of humanistic idealism.
    - akkad33 2y ago
      That's the traditional stereotype, but I have a hard time believing those whose internet presence is mostly manifested as Twitter stan wars and tiktok trends care about greater ideals than the next viral trend
    - a-french-anon 2y ago
      >I’m talking of the typical left/right split. Where leftist policies tend toward redistribution of wealth to the benefit of broader swathes Broader swathes which they're part of. This is just the millennia old has and has-nots, don't fall for wishful thinking this base.
    - 2y ago

sureIy 2y ago

This is akin to speed limits. Doing 50 km/h on a 20 km/h street isn't going to kill you, but can kill people outside your vehicle.