5 ms·
The controls I'm referring to limit all kids access simultaneously. Turning off just my kid's access doesn't change the social conditions under which kids inter
by kelseyfrog 1mo ago
The controls I'm referring to limit all kids access simultaneously. Turning off just my kid's access doesn't change the social conditions under which kids interact. It just cuts off them from their friend groups while nothing else changes.
Where in the settings do I go to turn off every kid's access at once? As far as I know, that setting is only accessible through my legislative representative.
- alex43578 1mo agoWhy are you allowed to dictate how others raise their children? They don’t get a say in your kids diet or religion or choice of sport.
- kelseyfrog 1mo agoThere are limits to laws and limiting social media companies' ability to have child users is well within those. If you don't like it, contact your representative instead of spinning your wheels on HN.
- marky1991 1mo agoI don't understand, could you rephrase your answer to his question? I read his question and read your response, but don't see a connection between the two.
- kyboren 1mo agoI'll rephrase it for you: "Fuck you".
- kelseyfrog 1mo agoExactly. Out donate me. Until then, it's whinging.
- marky1991 1mo agoSo, are you admitting there's no moral justification here? It's just 'do-it-because-you-want-to'?
- kelseyfrog 1mo agoDebate won't change the minds here. I've never seen a privacy-über-alles person arrive at social media should not exist. Maybe you have? I'd have to wipe entire years of experience raising my kids in a world of social media. How do you propose I do that?
- marky1991 1mo agoIf you aren't interested in changing minds, why do you comment in forum threads at all?
- kelseyfrog 1mo agoYou've seen someone about face? Please share a link to the thread. I'd love to read it.
- marky1991 1mo agoSorry, but that's not an answer to my question. To be honest, I'm starting to feel like you're not really talking to me, you're just responding to me. If you're asking for evidence of people changing their minds, I've done that, though I will admit I haven't done it in the past page of comments on hackernews. Normally it's not a wholesale change of opinion, but a shift in nuance or a changing of details. But even if I found such a thing, that doesn't answer my question.
- kelseyfrog 1mo agoRespectfully, I'll believe it when I see it. Most of my interactions in age gating discussions on HN have pushed me toward indignation, rather than nuance. It's arguing against someone's hypothetical dystopian nightmare. I'm tired of the game. If they want to affect change, they can do it financially as I am. Looking forward to seeing this same treatment on the privacy folks and how they respond.
- iamnothere 1mo agoIt seems like this EFF article is suggesting that sort of political action and attempting to coordinate it. Why exactly are you “spinning your wheels” here on HN?
- bigfudge 1mo agoThey do have plenty of influence over the environment your child lives in. Vaccination for public school entry would be a good example.
- alex43578 1mo agoVaccination has a very reasonable public health argument, even ignoring the fact that it has been massively eroded, and comparing vaccination to social media is disingenuous. If Timmy is on Instagram, John’s health isn’t at risk. If Timmy comes to school with measles, John’s health is at risk, and vaccination has been shown to reduce the risk to both Timmy and John.
- embedding-shape 1mo ago> Where in the settings do I go to turn off every kid's access at once? It might be worth re-reading this particular sentence again, out loud, and really consider what you're asking for here. And why stop at internet access once you're starting to think like this?
- ndriscoll 1mo agoThe above poster isn't saying Internet access; they're saying access to the ad-filled Skinner boxes that are trying to position themselves as necessary for communication through network effects. Incidentally, the bill doesn't even say they can't use them; it just says the platform has to tone down the Skinner box part for children. > This subdivision does not prohibit a covered platform from permitting a user who is under 16 years of age to create or maintain an account on the covered platform if that user is not provided with any addictive feature. So it's not a social media ban. It's an addictive features for children ban. And it seems kind of obvious that running an optimization algorithm with engagement/attention as the objective is going to be bad? If that optimization works, you would almost necessarily have to be detracting from other parts of the person's life (interfering with study, exercise, socialization, etc.), which seems to be exactly what we see in aggregate (lowering test scores, increased isolation, etc.).
- frumper 1mo agoThe poster seems to be asking to limit access to the platform, not change the platform to be non-addictive. I understand what you are saying is what the law is trying to accomplish, but I think they are clearly expressing the desire to limit all kids access to social media apps.
- logicchains 1mo ago>Turning off just my kid's access doesn't change the social conditions under which kids interact. It just cuts off them from their friend groups while nothing else changes. If you don't teach them to resist peer pressure when they're younger then they won't know how to when they turn 16 or 18 either, and they'll end up as losers with an external locus of control who blame other people and apps for their own failures of willpower.
- bigfudge 1mo agoPeer pressure is one thing. The entire commercial might of the US tech and cultural industry is harder to resist. It’s not fair to put responsibility on children to have willpower in their use of SM when thousands of PHds are actively researching how to make the services more addictive and increase their network effects.
- naishoya 1mo agoIt would appear that is exactly what is being proposed : to not place that responsibility on the children, but for the parents and other adults to shoulder that burden by not allowing the children to become victims of the addictive Social Media empire.
- mbonnet 1mo agoWhy do you think you need to take action on how other people raise their children?
- kelseyfrog 1mo agoWhy do you think you can limit what relationship I have with my legislative representative? If you don't like it, out spend me in political donations.
- dgellow 1mo agoWhat a non answer…
- kyboren 1mo agoGee, how very democratic. If others don't like how you're trying to curtail their liberty, they should just out-bribe the politicians. Just as the Framers intended.
- kelseyfrog 1mo agoYou're writing this like a kid whose about to have their internet taken away. If you're an adult, congrats, nothing changes.
- cindyllm 1mo ago[dead]
- baggy_trough 1mo agoI'll thank you to keep your filthy hands off my kids' access.