https://www.reuters.com/technology/australia-plans-social-media-ban-children-2024-09-09/
Discussion
The nanny state strikes again
Surely just an excuse to KYC the internetπ€
Exactly...
Plus they want control of your children so they can raise them to be good socialist commies.
* mental health problem exists *
The government:
SOUNDS LIKE A SETUP FOR CENSORSHIP DISASTER. PARENTS ARE THE ONES WHO SHOULD BE WATCHING AND SETTING RULES NOT THE STATE.
ufff βΊοΈ
They will just use this 'child safety' idea to start then go up to 18. Then maybe 21. Then only if you go through a government class. Typically tyrannical shit. Disgusting.
Govern me harder!
I don't disagree social media is messing kids up
But do you think it's the government's job to do it, or the parents?
Left wing Australian govt looking to ban children from social media.
This is a classic case of "there oughta be a law". Yes there may be some harm from social media, but that is a role for parents to moderate and control for their children.
It should not be the role of the state to implement some ham fisted policy that also stops children using internet social media in healthy and beneficial ways.
It also represents an unethical imposition onto private companies and software developers who will effectively be coerced to do the state's bidding.
nostr:note1ggqhhfzd5dd44grfhwcsyd5kexv0eg6nfe67lewwttwl923xvcms5npdyj
This will raise awareness about rights and freedoms, leading people to take an interest in things that no one can limit their right to use.
Good old Australia stepping up to "protect" (secretly control) everyone there. π¬
I shouldn't speak too soon. NZ probably isn't far behind, maybe a bit more secretive though π€¦ββοΈ
"Albanese didn't specify an age but said it would likely be between 14 and 16."
I guess this means it will be 15?!
I support this here in Norway too.
There is no conflict between being nostr only and wholeheartedly supporting that kids are kept away social media platforms. I mean, nobody should be on those platforms..
These addiction machines of surveillance capitalism are obviously harmful for us adults even with fully developed frontal cortices. Imagine the harm it does on millions (billions?) of kids in the most critical years of development, and what the opportunity cost is. We are losing out on the collective cognitive development of our species. This is in line with arguments put forth by people who have put down a lot of solid work on the topic, such as Desmurget, Twenge, Haidt etc.
Adults need open protocols and free speech. Kids of all ages need to be outdoors playing, doing fun&games, fight and resolve issues, push limits, do stupid stuff they can learn from.
There are no good reasons kids should have smartphones. Parents are simply justifying their own poor choices by hiding behind false claims. We all know it, smartphones are helpful babysitters when we're tired as hell, but it comes with a significant cost that is mostly hidden in a vail of low time preference.
I'm dying on this hill. Onwards.
AGREE SOCIAL IS BAD FOR CHILDREN.
SCREENS IN GENERAL ARE BAD FOR CHILDREN. AND ADULTS FOR THAT MATTER.
SHOULD BE THE PARENTS RESPONSIBILITY, NOT THE STATE.
THIS WILL BE USED AS AN EXCUSE TO KYC EVERYONE TO βPROTECT THE CHILDREN.β
Do you think Nostr should have a client designed for children?
Yes.
A client is one thing but there is basically no kid appropriate content available. At least, very little they'd find interesting at the moment.
There are so many cute things I see on here. Daily cat photos, mom and kid pranks, cooking with kids, how to woodwork, bugs bugs bugs, nature walks. I could compile a weeks worth of content to get the ball rolling. Then parents could add their own content. It won't be easy but it is doable.
You make a good point. Curious how to curate that though because while many users do post those things, the also post other stuff too. I wonder if there's a way to utilize these ai bots to sort and tag kid friendly content so the client can pick up those tags and selectively display content not just by follow but by tag as well
nostr:npub12z8jsett3k6rv9fa2guau5p540qr2xuvjzkr8e432mglafjt99sqkw9zmx is a good example of this. Her flower pics are amazing and absolutely kid friendly. The other half of her content isn't quite as kid friendly π
I think it would have to be a read only relay first, I'm assuming so it can be curated correctly, then working with content creators who would maybe hashtag items, then it would have to be approved by the relay operator. Or group client but invitation only π€· there are many possibilities. The AI bots are great idea, but I think someone needs to approve it to their topic related relay. I don't know, I'm not techy. π
FK YES
No.
Children shouldn't have access to phones or any social media to begin with.
The reality is they do already and it's not changing. Every thing is turning to computers. Hell we are starting to need a cellphone to open front doors. It's inevitable, but Nostr could create an environment that makes kids touch grass instead of forcing them to watch ads that are irrelevant or adult themed. These are the closed groups/relays that would be perfect for parents to participate. Help curb this growing epidemic by not banning the use of computers but nurturing healthier ecosystems. We can avoid it, and say no no no. We could have something like homeschool clients. Where the kids can chat and be monitored but also have calendars for playtime meetups.
This!! π«π
Look into the work of Jonathan Haidt and you'll start to understand how bad it is. Screens are terrible, notifications are addicting, social media is psychotic and it all plays into the overall social underdevelopment of kids.
I'm not going to say nostr couldn't play a role later in their adolescence as an alternative to legacy social media because it certainly can but that's not necessary until at minimum 16.
But parents who love their kids don't give them phones. Period. If a parent hands their kid a phone or tablet below 16, they simply don't love them enough. I have no problem saying that because I know what it has done to an entire generation or two of kids at this point.
Homeschooled kids have no reason to need a smartphone. Flip phones don't have the same effect and so would probably be okay if absolutely necessary for contacting parents/friends.
We don't need phones for anything if we choose to limit their use in our lives. We made the choice to join Nostr to escape these addictive platforms, we can make the choice to introduce our kids to technologies as appropriate. I don't plan on letting my daughter drink alcohol at seven and I won't let her have a smartphone until she's at least 16, probably 18.
It's as easy as you let it be.
I agree it's easy for us to change things.
Agreed. Parents need to come down hard on this. I'm in the Jonathan Haight camp.
What would be the main difference?
What are the differences?
I donβt feel any social platform should have anything for children. Buy them paper, envelopes and stamps.
Buy them bitcoin
Yes!
Interesting idea
*multiple clients
Yes π
I was thinking about this all day. If there is a way to vote for a kid compilant note with emojis for example, the kids's nostr app would filter just the right ones.
I've also been pondering this.
I'm generally opposed to handing kids smartphones, at least until they're teens. But at that point you could use parental controls to whitelist clients that have built in features that prevent certain content (i.e. "teen friendly", whatever that is..). Challenge with nostr is its benefit; openness. There are so many ways to access the protocol and find nsfw content..
Thinking out loud: What about a solution where you are the father-npub, and for the son/daughter-npub to see any content it needs to be approved by you (e.g. followed by you or those you follow). Of course, they could spin up their own npubs and work their way around that pretty quickly when they understand how nostr works.
No.
Parents need to be educated to not turn loose their children on the internet. Doing so is the same as turning your children loose on the streets of NYC or LA.
The same is true for TV as well.
No - I think we should have relay/s that cater for users with thin skins or young minds.
I don't think censoring should be performed by the client unless it's a setting a user configures.
I think clients censoring content isnt much of a deal, as long as its not censored at the protocol level.
These decisions should not be in the hands of the state. One size does not fit all.
I'm pragmatic on this topic.. and when it comes to kids and smartphones I think growing up without one fits most, if not all.
https://primal.net/e/note13ea78cpfd6z8qkzjfm0prrh6znn95q50lj06f9u358zducv7zklqgn0jxa
please stop using caps, it annoys me
+1 plz sir mi familia
fixed it for you.
"agree social is bad for children.
screens in general are bad for children. and adults for that matter.
should be the parents responsibility, not the state.
this will be used as an excuse to kyc everyone to βprotect the children.β"
STAND FURTHER BACK
ITS IMPORTANT TO SPEAK CLEARLY. THERE IS NO STOPPING THIS TRAIN.
All caps is less clear than proper casing in my view
Please stop complaining, it annoys me
HEβS GOING TO ALL CAPS EVEN HARDER NOW.
I hate it, too. And more difficult to. read.
But itβs his choice and I accept it.
Get annoyed by more serious shit π© bud! π€£
But he always wears a cap π
THIS IS #NOSTR. WE DO WHATEVER WE WANT HERE AND CURATE OUR OWN FEED BASED ON WHAT WE WANT TO SEE.
DON'T LIKE WHAT SOMEONE HAS TO SAY, OR HOW THEY SAY IT, YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE TJEM IN YOUR FEED.
UNFOLLOW AND/OR MUTE AND MOVE ON.
π GOOD LUCK
OK
He did asked nice, Oddie Man... and the ratio is getting there... πββοΈ... it could not have to been all small caps always though... πββοΈ...
WE CAN DO ON NOSTR WHATEVER WE WANT! THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF IT!
Tell me you don't know nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx without telling me you don't know nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx
Wind, please stop blowing, it annoys me!
Ok... see what i did there π
PLEASE
π―
It's the tragedy of the commons. Parents don't take responsibility because they don't see (or don't want to see) that this is a collective problem with long term consequences not only for their own kids. But to avoid their kids "being left out" they're handing them the internet in their pocket, powered by an addiction engine.
So as a parent trying to fight this trend tooth and nail, I'll take any help I can get. In Norway the trust in the state is higher than most places, so a state ban (or even recommendation) will trickle into the school system and be an ally.
Kids are not a commons fucking commie.
I think there's two separate conversations to be had. One concerns state overreach and the other the damage caused by social media, but they should be separated. There's zero doubt that social media and wider content can be poisonous and addictive. Children should be sheltered from it and most rational parents would come to the same conclusion. It's not the state's role to parent my child, it's mine. The issue with legislation like this is that it's inevitably an easy win Trojan horse to further control and coercion of internet use for the rest of society.
If you think all that about social media, smartphones, etc, which I think too, why would you need the State to make YOU disallow YOUR children from using those devices?
If you believe those things, you are already doing it, in a much more fine-tuned way than any bureaucrat can possibly put into a law, suited to your exact preferences and your children's personalities and developmental stage.
But of course, most likely your concern is what OTHER people do. But other people's children are none of your business.
So I agree with most of what you write. I'm not that concerned when it comes to my own kids, I have stamina on this issue and they know why they're not getting those devices. They've accepted it, but they're not happy about it. Many of their peers are getting devices and at some point my kids will have to struggle with feeling left out. Still, I think they can handle it. Upside of excessive screentime and smartphones for kids is negligible compared to the downsides.
But, this is a collective problem that hits hardest at the lower level of the socioeconomic spectrum. The most important and effective tool is for parents to collaborate on this issue, but given the trust norwegians have in the state, it is a helpful signal when the state recommends kids to grow up without smartphones.
As mentioned, I'm pragmatic on this issue and will not complain if the state pulls in the same direction.
introduction to KYC internet
The step towards online kyc continues.
Without that, this is a just another completely unenforceable meaningless law.
While I agree that kids should be nowhere near social media it feels like a dangerous overreach (age verification: wtf) with possibly bad consequences. This should be a parenting decision only.
Exactly my thoughts too. On the other hand some parents are neglectful and let their kids waste their childhoods on phones so this could benefit a lot of them but ultimately this is not the job of government.
Unfortunately, most parents I know will not take the time to learn the apps their kids want to use, or they simply turn a blind eye. It takes one kid in the friend group to get the app before the rest start begging for it too because they don't want to be left out.
They always start denying freedom with the children and the rich.
They know more than the parents π€‘π
"...sparking a backlash from digital rights advocates..."
What about parental rights advocates? These are decisions that parents should be making, not the state.
Parents should be in control. Government should have no higher authority over kids than parents do.
If you didn't post the url in all caps, it never happened
"This ... move ... threatens to create serious harm by excluding young people from meaningful, healthy participation in the digital world...", and sugary cereal is "part of a balanced breakfast".