Hacker News Reader

Comment by iamcurious | Hacker News Reader

If only parents could exert some sort of influence or authority over others harming their children.

We could call it "sueing".

Why just limit it social media? Why not also include video games, streaming services, movies, etc.?

Agreed. It should be applied to all services which are optimized for addiction. Social media is just the worst of the bunch due to its built in peer pressure.

My favorite is gacha games of any flavor. Please keep that crap out of the hands of children.

You could argue that reading is addictive, maybe some people find math so as well. I became addicted to computers when I was a kid and we didn't even have the internet. Sports can be addictive, along with dancing, or just plain socializing. Silly, yes, but you can bet that there'd be lawsuits claiming all sorts of things are addictive and some number will find sympathetic juries. Seems like a pretty bad idea to me.

And mid-1980s heavy metal music too.

And those pesky books, the insolence!

  - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1884)
  - The Catcher in the Rye (1951)

Why not give people both the freedom and personal responsibility instead of making assigning parental duties to the government like China has recently?

There are age restrictions on casinos. And we have a rating system for movies and games to inform adults about the content.

You can. You just have to make a strong enough argument to prove video games cause violence for a judge to let the case proceed. There's a reason it doesn't matter and it's not because video games are beyond banning.

Not for causing violence but for addiction. That’s a pretty easy argument and easy to prove causality (more game time = worse school/social life).

Why limit this logic to just social media sites and not other things that kids can be addicted to?

What a lazy, pathetic attitude. Why don't you sue candy makers while you're at it?

If you don't want to perform a parent's job, DON'T HAVE KIDS.

I detest social-media companies in general, but clogging up our courts with this namby-pamby bullshit is offensive to every citizen.

And ugh, just as people were mocking Reddit's declining culture, a couple of them turn around and down-mod this oh-so-hurtful sentiment.

Pull up your big-boy pants and parent your kids, because taxpayers shouldn't be paying for your nanny. They're already paying for your kids' schooling.

And those same kids will be wiping your arse whilst you're drooling in an old people's home. Stop repeating this nonsense that somehow we can all just be individuals disjoint from society.

Never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

> others harming their children

I'd suggest they did harm to their own children when they allowed a smartphone and social media at an early age.

> early age

Given that the human brain is still forming into your 20's, the harm can happen at any age. And given how much social media pressures impact teenagers, it doesn't even require that early of an age.

Are you suggesting that my comment is incorrect, that parents are okay to allow access to smartphones/tables/etc. for their children, because our brains can be harmed by social media at many other ages?

I believe that is what they call whataboutism, unless I misunderstood the point of your comment. When people comment at me I usually assume they're attempting to correct me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com