Hacker News Reader

Comment by JKCalhoun | Hacker News Reader

> People who asked for social media bans for kids got what they wanted. They'll have to live with the consequences for the rest of their lives. We all will.

I guess I'm fine with not visiting any of these age-restricted sites. They're not the thing I would miss if the whole internet shut down. (In fact, there's precious little I would miss — maybe just archive.org?)

View on HN

He said, on an online forum.

Sure, ha ha. But I was talking about things I would miss.

It's going to be every website. There will be no place they will stop. You think a forum like this one where it's conceivably possible someone in a bad category could interact with someone under the age of 16, however unlikely, won't be regulated?

"But sir! The largest websites on the internet implement Government ID Age Check. Just federate with one of those, why are you complaining so much? Don't you want to protect the children or stop anti-Semitism or something?"

You might be exaggerating the dangers a bit I think, but I'm not disagreeing with you.

I'm kind of a hard sell though because I think sometimes that life before there was an internet was preferable.

To be sure, like anyone, I can think of plenty of positives that the internet has brought. But as a net positive? I'm increasingly having my doubts.

yep. the whole purpose of this is to stop people from communicating with each other, and only consume approved vetted sources. they'd probably prefer to keep tech out of people's hands entirely (why would serfs need that?!?), but it is too useful for the purposes of surveillance and control.

If "save the children" creates enough friction to bring the demise of social media then I'll go lay a flower on Anita Bryant's grave and tell her I'm sorry.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com