undefined | Better HN

0 pointspalata1mo ago0 comments

I disagree with that part.

Parents cannot be responsible for what other children can do.

If all the children use social media, good luck preventing your kid from participating. "It's okay, just be completely disconnected from everything they share between each other, it's not important to socialise, you can make friends when you are old".

The problem with social media is that it's not okay for one kid to be disconnected. What we want as a society is to prevent them all, so that they are all in the same situation.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

hnlmorg1mo ago· 2 in thread

Again, you’re talking about things in a Boolean state.

Our kids have access to social media, but we also know what they have access to because we check their phones periodically.

This is a far better approach than an “all or nothing” approach because we are giving the kids the freedom to learn how to use these tools maturely. But without removing any safety nets for if/when our kids (or any other kids in their social circles) fail to use such tools responsibly.

That’s called “parenting”.

Censoring access to tools, either via government regulations or over zealous parenting, doesn’t teach children anything. Whereas allowing kids to learn to use the tools but being around to support and help them grow when mistakes are made, is precisely what responsible parents should be doing.

And that’s the same approach you should take with learning anything as a child. You give them guidance and allow them to make mistakes but be there to support them. Kids don’t learn to ride a bike from telling them “bikes are dangerous” then suddenly when they’re 16 handing them a bike and telling them to ride it to colleague. So why are you treating social media like that?

palataOP1mo ago

> Again, you’re talking about things in a Boolean state.

I am not, so either you don't understand my opinion, or you manipulate it because it's convenient.

I am not, AT ALL, saying that we should make bikes illegal to kids. But some things make sense to me: we should not sell cigarettes or alcohol to kids. "Go ahead my son, you're 13, you should make your own mistakes: try smoking for a month like your friends, and then I'll explain to you why it is a bad idea" is not how I apprehend "parenting".

I am actually saying that it is nuanced, and that it is difficult to know where to put the limit. Should cocaine be allowed to kids? Cannabis? Cigarettes? Social media? Bikes? Chocolate?

> So why are you treating social media like that?

Maybe you think that social media are like bikes, and that's your right. I think they are closer to drugs. Maybe you think everything should be legal (drugs, killing, ...) and that "parenting" is the solution to all, I don't.

Like cigarettes, the message is "you should never do it, but when you'll get older it will be your choice to do that stupid shit". That is obviously not how I treat bikes.

hnlmorg1mo ago

The social media problem isn’t going to be solved by treating it like cigarettes. It’s solved by teaching kids how moderate their use of it. And that only comes with practice. So banning it for children and then expecting them to use it responsibly once they have access is unrealistic.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse