Hacker News Reader

Comment by Bellamy | Hacker News Reader

Bigger problem is the parents who let their children watch youtube or whatever way too much.

I'm curious of the long term effects.

Like you, I also think it's a disgrace. I had a friend who to me basically seemed like they didn't like dealing with kids, so just gave her daughter a tablet she was glued to at all times. I mean, young, I don't remember the age now but less than 2? She never made eye contact or any noise, just messing with the tablet. I can't help but think there's going to be a whole generation of socially broken kids. But, here's hoping I'm wrong.

I think we might already be at a few... Though in vastly different ways. I don't think social media has been healthy, but just pure consumers that might be coming up could be worse...

I can't be the only person here who spent their youth glued to a computer, can I?

There are arguments made for and against that as well, but having a toddler glued to a tablet definitely doesn't seem right.

Also (assuming you were born in the 80s/early 90s), the internet of our childhood is VASTLY different from what it is today... Both in good ways and bad, but mostly bad ways.

I suppose, but I'm not sure it was that much more salutary obsessively reading GameFAQs or Something Awful forums.

So I think there are two aspects about this. They said the same about previous generations with music and TV. I really do think they are shared experiences of a specific generation. Referencing the Simpsons is a quick way to bond with new peers.

On the other side, it's an opportunity cost to doing something else. When you start learning anything about child development it gets a bit horrifying. For example, for young kids there are a bunch of stages to learning to talk. Watching video recordings doesn't fulfill much of the development. A lot relies on trial and error of interacting with someone speaking instead of passively watching something flat (or animated) that was prerecorded. For older ages, sitting in front of an iPad means foregoing motor development or peer engagement...or just building bad habits about fitness.

Sure, blame the parents, and not the society that leaves us all exhausted from working too much and the dopamine-optimized algorithmic engagement furnace that is YouTube.

Yeah just keep blaming parents. That'll make everything better.

Being a parent is about sacrifice, lots and lots of it. That includes working yourself beyond exhaustion to provide for, feed, play with, give attention to, and talk with your kids. It isn't easy, but it's the moral responsibility of everyone who becomes a parent.

I realize a huge percentage of parents fail at this (some more than others), and the amount of work that must be done to make a living and the ease with which things like Youtube make handing off parenting to them doesn't help matters. But the moral responsibility still ultimately resides with the parents themselves.

Yeah and the issue here is the marketing claims behind YouTube Kids are straight up false. It's setting up parents for failure by piling onto the already-exhausting burden.

It's just plain wrong.

Sure, being a parent is a massive moral responsibility. But the facts are that many kids have shitty parents through no fault of their own. I see kids who's parents let them go on Youtube/Tiktok for hours with no supervision. The fact is that if we don't do something as a society for these kids now, we'll be paying their therapy bills through our insurance in a couple of decades. So probably more efficient to do something now.

The problem with society is that we've gotten to a point where everything is always somebody else's fault. No one is ever responsible for anything, it must be the fault of social conditioning, corporations, religions, upbringing, or literally anything else you want to blame. Sure those things play a part, but ultimately people are responsible for what they do. If someone is letting their 3 year old spend hours in front of YouTube every day then that's really their fault, not Google's

Come back to me when you've come home from a long workday to deal with the results of telling a small child "no" yet again. It's not pretty, and you gotta save your "nos" for what matters.

Setting up some parent to believe that letting their kid explore YouTube Kids on their own is a good idea through your marketing and then having the vast majority of the content on the service be low quality dreck with no redeeming value is setting up parents for failure.

YouTube Kids either needs to curate a lot better (as if) or back off on their marketing claims.

I do it everyday man. I had to block a kids channel called FGTV. The dad who runs the channel is super inappropriate and I didn't want my son to learn from him. Do you think my 5 year old understood that?

>It's not pretty, and you gotta save your "nos" for what matters.

Yes, but I'd argue that this matters.

Sure but you don’t even need to use a “no” once you realize that YT Kids is hot garbage and make it not even an option anymore.

This is a perfectly well-reasoned and responsible comment. I have no doubt that's what will make it unsuitable for upvoting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com