5 ms·

The future of our society is in a large part online, and I'd rather youth to grow up into those platforms with adequate tools to handle them than to just get in

The future of our society is in a large part online, and I'd rather youth to grow up into those platforms with adequate tools to handle them than to just get in at 16. No matter what phenomena you look at, by the time a generation grows around a certain tech or condition as a given it just blends into everyday normal life. It happened with the TV, Internet, Instant Messaging, YouTube, Facebook and now TikTok. Happens as we speak with ChatGPT. I wouldn't ban it until 16 either, I'd teach kids about it from first grade.

BlueTemplar 2y ago
There's a difference between TV / Internet / Instant Messaging and YouTube / Facebook / TikTok / ChatGPT. The former are general concepts, while the latter are specific companies that are arguably damaging enough to be worth banning at the level of the whole society (except maybe in their home countries, which of course makes the situation harder to deal with).
ohmy987 2y ago
> The future of our society is in a large part online I wonder how accurate this is. I have no account in any social media except in LinkedIn (which I see more as a job portal than social media), and that's how I raise my kids. I live without facebook, instagram, twitter, or whatever else and I'd risk to say life is better without those.
- FollowingTheDao 2y ago
  It is not accurate. This person is one of those extremes they talk about in the paper. "For instance, news stories that express outgroup animosity are 67% more likely to be shared on social media (Rathje et al., 2021). " They are holding an extreme view and posting it online.
- saagarjha 2y ago
  You’re on social media right now fwiw
  - averageRoyalty 2y ago
    Are they? Personally (and I know many others agree with this) I wouldn't class BBS', forums, an online guestbook, Steam etc as 'social media'. I can't quite qualify the delineation, but it is there.
    - CaptainFever 2y ago
      The definition of social media from Oxford is "websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking". I think that describes HN. We participate in social networking on this website, and we can share content, and create content (in the form of comments, Show HNs, etc). Personally, and this is a bit of a "hot take", but I think some people trying to define a difference is just trying to justify continue using HN and forums like Reddit while still hating on social media or wanting it banned. To be consistent with getting off social media, I think one ought to get off HN and Reddit completely as well (use a site blocker extension). But yeah this is a bit of an inflammatory opinion, I understand.
    - nicklaf 2y ago
      Hacker News lacks a few distinguishing features that are characteristic of modern corporate social media: in particular, algorithmically driven feeds based on engagement metrics optimized for an advertising business model. The closest you get to that on here is the main page featuring YC companies from time to time (which is a far cry from a Tik Tok rabbit hole). That being said, voting mechanisms which change the order of user-contributed content is hallmark of social media shared by Hacker News. I like to think, though, that this place has a strong enough community to prevent the voting dynamics from devolving to what you see on the most politicized subreddits. (I'll mention that the quality on here is in no small part the result of dang's diligent moderation, btw!) An interesting message board to compare Hacker News with in this regard is actually 4chan. The former is maybe less social media like inasmuch as we have no inline images here, so there is no room for the sort of meme culture you see on the latter. On the other hand, 4chan is entirely bereft of voting (and even accounts to assign karma to, although reusable tripcodes come the closest), and as such is in some ways even more egalitarian (in contrast to non-anonymous social media).
gonzo41 2y ago
Nobody wants their daughter to go search out a make up video then after 3 or 4 of those to start getting pro-anorexia content because the algorithm knows it drives engagement. we already know the answer to the ills of social media, the better solution would be to force companies to have chronological feeds and non algorithmically targeted suggestions.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
throw_pm23 2y ago
This is like saying that smoking and alcohol consumption is the future, so better get kids to start doing it as early as possible.
FollowingTheDao 2y ago
I think the age should be higher or it should be banned all together. Why? Because the good it adds to society is trivial. You know how I know? Because I know plenty of people who do not use it and they are getting along just fine. I also know people who pretty much do not use the internet outside of work and get along fine. We are told we need these things by people who are selling us these things. And what you are saying is we should teach these kids how to live in a horrible, distorted attention economy that is warping our social norms to an extreme instead of building them a healthy society and economy.
nkrisc 2y ago
Most people I meet seem to treat online stuff either as mere amusement or an annoying thing they need to deal with to get done what they need done. Most people do not live online. They use the Internet because they need to (and usually hate it while they do) or simply as a tool to communicate or amuse. They don’t care about AI, or federated this and that, or about open source, or about walled gardens, or any of that sort of stuff.

BlueTemplar 2y ago

There's a difference between TV / Internet / Instant Messaging and YouTube / Facebook / TikTok / ChatGPT. The former are general concepts, while the latter are specific companies that are arguably damaging enough to be worth banning at the level of the whole society (except maybe in their home countries, which of course makes the situation harder to deal with).

ohmy987 2y ago

> The future of our society is in a large part online I wonder how accurate this is. I have no account in any social media except in LinkedIn (which I see more as a job portal than social media), and that's how I raise my kids. I live without facebook, instagram, twitter, or whatever else and I'd risk to say life is better without those.

FollowingTheDao 2y ago
It is not accurate. This person is one of those extremes they talk about in the paper. "For instance, news stories that express outgroup animosity are 67% more likely to be shared on social media (Rathje et al., 2021). " They are holding an extreme view and posting it online.
saagarjha 2y ago
You’re on social media right now fwiw
- averageRoyalty 2y ago
  Are they? Personally (and I know many others agree with this) I wouldn't class BBS', forums, an online guestbook, Steam etc as 'social media'. I can't quite qualify the delineation, but it is there.
  - CaptainFever 2y ago
    The definition of social media from Oxford is "websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking". I think that describes HN. We participate in social networking on this website, and we can share content, and create content (in the form of comments, Show HNs, etc). Personally, and this is a bit of a "hot take", but I think some people trying to define a difference is just trying to justify continue using HN and forums like Reddit while still hating on social media or wanting it banned. To be consistent with getting off social media, I think one ought to get off HN and Reddit completely as well (use a site blocker extension). But yeah this is a bit of an inflammatory opinion, I understand.
  - nicklaf 2y ago
    Hacker News lacks a few distinguishing features that are characteristic of modern corporate social media: in particular, algorithmically driven feeds based on engagement metrics optimized for an advertising business model. The closest you get to that on here is the main page featuring YC companies from time to time (which is a far cry from a Tik Tok rabbit hole). That being said, voting mechanisms which change the order of user-contributed content is hallmark of social media shared by Hacker News. I like to think, though, that this place has a strong enough community to prevent the voting dynamics from devolving to what you see on the most politicized subreddits. (I'll mention that the quality on here is in no small part the result of dang's diligent moderation, btw!) An interesting message board to compare Hacker News with in this regard is actually 4chan. The former is maybe less social media like inasmuch as we have no inline images here, so there is no room for the sort of meme culture you see on the latter. On the other hand, 4chan is entirely bereft of voting (and even accounts to assign karma to, although reusable tripcodes come the closest), and as such is in some ways even more egalitarian (in contrast to non-anonymous social media).

gonzo41 2y ago

Nobody wants their daughter to go search out a make up video then after 3 or 4 of those to start getting pro-anorexia content because the algorithm knows it drives engagement. we already know the answer to the ills of social media, the better solution would be to force companies to have chronological feeds and non algorithmically targeted suggestions.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

throw_pm23 2y ago

This is like saying that smoking and alcohol consumption is the future, so better get kids to start doing it as early as possible.

FollowingTheDao 2y ago

I think the age should be higher or it should be banned all together. Why? Because the good it adds to society is trivial. You know how I know? Because I know plenty of people who do not use it and they are getting along just fine. I also know people who pretty much do not use the internet outside of work and get along fine. We are told we need these things by people who are selling us these things. And what you are saying is we should teach these kids how to live in a horrible, distorted attention economy that is warping our social norms to an extreme instead of building them a healthy society and economy.

nkrisc 2y ago

Most people I meet seem to treat online stuff either as mere amusement or an annoying thing they need to deal with to get done what they need done. Most people do not live online. They use the Internet because they need to (and usually hate it while they do) or simply as a tool to communicate or amuse. They don’t care about AI, or federated this and that, or about open source, or about walled gardens, or any of that sort of stuff.