Support NeoGAF

[Z O N E]

The Japanese example is a very interesting one, thanks for sharing it.

Regarding parents, I can tell you as a teacher that many kids understand their phones way better than the parents do. Which isn't that surprising considering how much time they spend on the devices.

Some parent understand locking their kids out of problematic apps or features, or limiting their screen time via OS controls, but I wouldn't say it's the majority of parents yet.

But my point was that a default lock on everything potentially harmful is something that is both easy to legislate and easy for manufacturers to build into phones so parents only have to concern themselves with removing locks. I think that's a more practical and effective way to accomplish the goal in question, without putting people's privacy at risk, or counting on busy parents to figure it out themselves.

There will ALWAYS be workarounds for those kinds of things.

Since you're a teacher, what do you think about inviting parents in and then showing them how to enable parental controls on devices? Tell them kids are using phones in class and are distracting the class. Then you can mention that, rather than taking their phone away from them, which some parents would be against, you can show them how they can enable parental controls which would stop kids using social media or even the browser and even the app store. That way they can focus in the class.

Asking the government to step in will cause a HELL of a lot more issues regarding privacy than securing privacy.

At the end of the day, it's up to the parents to parent their kids and a teacher educating them about parental controls might open their eyes up.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

That's a problem that needs to be handled by the parents, not government. If you can't take the minuscule amount of time it takes to research something like this that's on you. If you are willingly giving them a device you can't understand yourself, or at least know what it has access to, you are failing your child.

Ok. So what you're saying is that every parent of a minor with access to social media and other harmful apps and websites is failing their child.

Now what?

 

[22:22:22]

there are adults who should be banned from social media, so I guess.

In a way the damage is already done. It was on purpose though so no turning back now.

 

[Lucifers Beard]

Social media is now just a fucking soapbox for everyone to stand on and shout about their political views. It's an absolute fucking disaster that needs to die off.

Just get rid of it all together. Message boards are about as far as it should have ever gone.

 

[SoloCamo]

Ok. So what you're saying is that every parent of a minor with access to social media and other harmful apps and websites is failing their child.

Now what?

Yes, if your kid is allowed unfiltered access to things they should not be using they are failing. Nothing new, parents have been failing kids since the dawn of time.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

There will ALWAYS be workarounds for those kinds of things.

Since you're a teacher, what do you think about inviting parents in and then showing them how to enable parental controls on devices? Tell them kids are using phones in class and are distracting the class. Then you can mention that, rather than taking their phone away from them, which some parents would be against, you can show them how they can enable parental controls which would stop kids using social media or even the browser and even the app store. That way they can focus in the class.

Asking the government to step in will cause a HELL of a lot more issues regarding privacy than securing privacy.

At the end of the day, it's up to the parents to parent their kids and a teacher educating them about parental controls might open their eyes up.

As a teacher, I do the things you've mentioned and can tell you from experience many parents are too busy or too inexperienced with tech to keep up with every new potentially harmful app or social network. Some parents are great at it, and some are just not.

And I completely support banning smartphones from most classes, but that's just because of how out of control their use has become. As tools, they have a lot of potential to enrich learning if they are not abused. So while we do ban them when that is the best option, there should also be easier ways to limit abuse without banning.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

Yes, if your kid is allowed unfiltered access to things they should not be using they are failing. Nothing new, parents have been failing kids since the dawn of time.

You're not offering a solution to anything, though. Condemning a large part of the population does nothing to change the situation. It just restates the problem in different terms.

 

[SoloCamo]

You're not offering a solution to anything, though. Condemning a large part of the population does nothing to change the situation. It just restates the problem in different terms.

The solution was posted, as a parent, if you are buying and providing an item to a child, you should research it first. I'm not going to feed my kid a wild berry from a bush without knowing if it's safe to consume, why should other parents get a free pass?

 

[Go_Ly_Dow]

Social media is a trainwreck and for the most part a massive waste of time. There are a few minor benefits (the marketplace sell/buy feature) and event management so you can organise meets in the real world. But apart from that its useless.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

The solution was posted, as a parent, if you are buying and providing an item to a child, you should research it first. I'm not going to feed my kid a wild berry from a bush without knowing if it's safe to consume, why should other parents get a free pass?

That's like saying "people shouldn't litter". Of course they shouldn't, the question is how do you enforce it?

 

[SoloCamo]

That's like saying "people shouldn't litter". Of course they shouldn't, the question is how do you enforce it?

By reinforcing good behavior and punishing misbehavior. Adults are free to make their own choices, but people littering probably didn't have great parenting. And if they did, they are just a crappy person in general. Your point of view is basically 'it'll happen anyways so why bother' - and that's the last thing I'd like kids learning.

 

[Mithos]

What grade was that in? I would guess in secondary school probably around grade 10. Florida laws wouldn't prevent that from happening in grades 9-12.

How old are people in those grades?
Sex education starts in grade 4-6 in Sweden and kids are like 9-11 years old at that time.

Also in Swedish schools nowadays you relinquish your phone at the start of every lesson, and get it back at the end of every lesson, in SOME schools you have to relinquish it at the first lesson of the day, and you only get it back after the last lesson/when you leave for home.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

By reinforcing good behavior and punishing misbehavior. Adults are free to make their own choices, but people littering probably didn't have great parenting. And if they did, they are just a crappy person in general. Your point of view is basically 'it'll happen anyways so why bother' - and that's the last thing I'd like kids learning.

My point isn't "why bother", it's "offer practical solutions". To re-educate everyone is difficult and takes a very long time. While that's going on, other things can be done in the short term. The OP is about attempting to legislate such a short term solution, for example.

 

[DeaDPo0L84]

This one is tough, my immediate opinion is I don't disagree with the intent but in practice I'm not sure how big an impact it will have in the long run. Also this is just in Florida and the world is pretty big outside of that one state. I think one thing everyone can agree with regardless of party lines is social media is legit destroying our youth and while we're paying for it now the real consequence will come later when they're older and we are meant to depend on them and they have zero social skills or ability to function in any environment that contains any sort of stress.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Personally I’m all for it. Kids are way too wrapped up in that shit. Let’s be honest; nothing good comes out of it.

 

[Nydius]

How do you even enforce this law.

Realistically it’s unenforceable, which is why, if you read the bill, all of the penalties are civil actions, not criminal ones. Easier to get something in a civil court but it usually requires the aggrieved party (which in most of these cases would be the parents) to initiate the lawsuit.

To truly enforce at a criminal level would require giving government near totalitarian control over your privacy and identity.

 

[Nydius]

I mean...good? At least for social media, it should never have been anonymous in the first place.

I swear people have very short memories.

As I posted earlier, Nikki Haley called for this and it effectively torched her campaign as she got utterly obliterated by Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and everyone in between.

But going back further, do you remember the absolute shitshow when Blizzard was planning to force people to use their new Real ID system to supposedly combat online toxicity?

GAF may require legitimate “non-freeware” email addresses to register but we’re all still mostly anonymous here unless we choose otherwise. Would you continue to use the site if you had to provide your identity details to mods and could only post using your real, legal, name?

The Greater Internet Dickwad Theory predates the public launch of Facebook by two years, so it’s not like social media has created something new. I remember the same level of toxic shit on Usenet groups and pre-internet BBS’s.

Laws like these are a slippery slope for privacy and free speech rights. Edit: Not to mention safety. If you think doxxing is bad now, imagine how bad it would be if people could hack a social media database and get everyone’s full identification details.

 

[SoloCamo]

My point isn't "why bother", it's "offer practical solutions". To re-educate everyone is difficult and takes a very long time. While that's going on, other things can be done in the short term. The OP is about attempting to legislate such a short term solution, for example.

Half baked useless solutions such as the one done here in FL will not change anything. Real change requires hard work and time, I'd say if parents cared it'd be time well spent.

 

[Chuck Berry]

Im totally down with keeping kids away from social media

What Im not down with is allowing governments to become the parental units

 

[xrnzaaas]

Social media ban = yes, it's a healthy move and you can still use the Internet without social media
Youtube, general Internet ban (like in china) = no

 

[Hudo]

This should be law in every country in the world. And I would increase the age to at least 16.

 

[Thaedolus]

I’m totally for restricting social media from children, but good luck with government enforcement. When my kids get devices, they’ll be on lockdown until they’re 18.

 

[Rentahamster]

Not to mention safety. If you think doxxing is bad now, imagine how bad it would be if people could hack a social media database and get everyone’s full identification details.

Much less have the government be privy to these private details in the first place. They've been trying to de-anonymize the internet for years "for our own safety", and it seems they might have found a pretense to make that acceptable.

For kids under 14? Sure. Unlike half the country, I actually have a lot of confidence in Florida. I'm not for over reach so let's not go full hyperbole mode.

Kids were just fine before all the stupid internet.

Having the government take more and more control over what our kids can do is as close to a literal "nanny state" as you can get. But the vibes fulfill my preconceived opinions about shit I don't like so fuck my principles

edit: the second sentence isn't directed at you necessarily, it's for the average citizen who talks about hating a nanny state but does actions to also enable one too. Total cognitive dissonance.

 

[Rawbutt Jellybean]

Instead of a ban I'd like to see these social media and tech companies in general be pressured into removing or reducing the harmful aspects of their services. Would benefit everyone.

 

[ResurrectedContrarian]

Make it a crime to use the data of minors (or advertise to them) in any form online. To knowingly have minor users and knowingly market to them in any way, profit off them in any way, or use even the most basic information about them -- these should be crimes with penalties high enough to immediately sink any company.

Then, the problem will mostly solve itself. The reason so many kids are on these apps is that it's lucrative.

 

[Arsic]

Major dub.

Now make it nation wide.

 

[Laptop1991]

I'm wondering how they will actually stop teens just getting round it someway, i'm not sure how effective the bill will be in reality.

 

[DaleinCalgary]

Probably smart, I'd ban up to 65 years old if it was me.

 

[AlphaDump]

No thanks, i can manage my child just fine.

Zero education on how to manage or navigate social media and they are just going to put a ban on it. With heavy fines if the parent doesn't tie an ID to it.

Just like his education policies and moms of liberty bullshit, he's giving every parent here in FL a fucking headache.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

The number of kids and parents listening to this ban will be little, but any bit helps.

Its not just about social media stupidity, but also the less kids are on social media the more they might actually get out of the house and play some football in the park, play some street hockey (maybe in Florida they dont do that anyway) or just have kids be kids and dont be fat asses on the couch.

Like any of us back in the day, we played video games, board games and watched after school TV. But unless some of you were total hermits when you got home from school you probably interacted with friends face to face after school or on weekends and did stuff together. Heck, I still remember my buddies and I on BMX bikes in grade school and doing dirt mound jumps in fields and one guy's older brother who built wooden ramps and we'd do that shit on the street in front of his house. Hardly ever see kids biking.

I cant remember the last time I saw kids playing street hockey. You dont get that in busy streets to begin with, but even just driving down smaller roads never see it anymore. It used to be a thing the whole neighbourhood came out and older bros and young bros all just goofed around. And then there were the games only the older kids played and you watched. But then in grade school it gets to a point you organize among friends where to play and who has a goalie pads and a net. Then you either meet back at school or at the kid's street who has the most gear so you go to his area. We did this shit right to high school graduation.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

For those of you talking the past page about what is social media and what is a forum, to me there are similarities, but the key difference to me is that a lot of social media sites have people using their real name, photo, job, location etc.... It's almost like a living breathing Yellow Pages for a lot of people. But instead of you being in a 1000 page book as a one liner nobody will notice or even verify that is really you since there might be 100 Tom Smiths, social media like Twitter has a lot of people using their real identities. And when you do that you get in trouble. Maybe not places like Linkedin because people act professional, but Twitter, YT, etc... seem like a free for all of idiocy.

Forums on the other hand seem to have the vast majority never revealing their real name, pic or anything. Some do, but most dont as the average forum user isn't trying to make a career out of it or begging for followers for attention. You post, have fun and thats the end of it. Nobody knows who you are so it's pretty hard to get bullied or doxed or stalked.

Put it this way, would any of you consider Yahoo Finance's stock board Conversation tab as social media? It's all random people goofing around with no real identities. It so barren of identity, most people dont even upload an avatar pic and a lot of people like me are identified by just the first letter of our name since it takes your Yahoo profile name. So if I put my first name as T, my stock profile name is T. It's a social site of people gabbing news, analysis, trolling and stupidity, but to me that is not social media. Nobody is going to go ape shit, nor any posts get picked up by the media from people having fun talking about an oil company dividend. But a place like Twitter is social media as it can lead to a lot more consequences.