this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2025
306 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
69109 readers
2405 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But they don't. So what's your solution? To me "sorry kids, but you should be mentally damaged if your parents don't have the inclination or ability to block social media" isn't a solution.
You can't just leave kids to be fucked over in the event their parents aren't properly regulating them to the fullest.
We have laws preventing children from buying alcohol, but based on your thinking, we should get rid of those. After all, it's the parents' responsibility to ensure their children don't get drunk...
This is just going back to the "well it's on the parents. And if kids get damaged in the process, that's unfortunate, but society shouldn't try to prevent it"
Charge parents with neglect if they should have been expected to notice and respond to problems. That should be a jailable offense. Having kids comes with an obligation to make an effort.
If problems are noticed and parents aren't doing their job, kids should be relocated to families that will do their job and the parents jailed for child abuse.
I'm more saying the age limit is clumsy here since the real issue is understanding and consenting to risk. Businesses aren't equipped to handle that, and parents can't really regulate it, hence the age limit.
Social media is completely different though, since parents are in direct control of the devices their kids have access to at home, and what's available on their home network. Parents have the power to handle this themselves, so they should be expected to do so. The government can (and probably should) provide education and tools, as well as provide some form of consequences if parents neglect that responsibility, but it shouldn't take that role itself.
Great, send everyone to jail. Overcrowd prisons and put children into care. All because a parent let their child on social media...
It isn't. We have age limits for all kinds of things. How should this be any different?
Parents can also control whether children buy alcohol, yet we still have restrictions on children.
I'd rather put crappy parents there than drug users. Free anyone there for purely non-violent crimes (i.e. no clear victim) to make room for bad parents. The jail term shouldn't be long, and it should include education.
No, the standard would be much higher than that. There needs to be actual, tangible harm to the child directly related to their negligence.
Not really. Many kids have spending money and go to the store without supervision. If I'm not with them, I don't have control over what they do.