California bill would let parents sue social media companies for addicting kids
I’m still stunned that so many techies of the generation that grew up in the Wild West era of early internet freedom are now quick to applaud silly legislation to let parents sue social media companies for vaguely defined offenses.<p>Back when I was younger, the internet evilness was chat rooms and video games, both of which were supposedly addicting us and corrupting our young, helpless minds. We all knew it was ridiculous and mocked the “think of the children” attacks. We also turned out fine.<p>Then a couple decades pass and many of the same people are in full on “think of the children” mode over the latest generation of internet social interactions. I know commenters will claim it’s different this time, but I think the real difference is that people are getting older and out of touch. I’m guessing most of the anti-social media crusaders on HN don’t even use social media sites like Facebook and Instagram, but instead get their opinions from exaggerated news stories, just as our parents did back when the internet was new.<p>Does anyone here really think there is an “addictiveness” feature in the Facebook algorithm that can be toggled on and off like this article suggests? Does anyone think kids will just shrug and accept whatever limitations are imposed on them, or will they find creative ways to get a second account and set the age to 18 like we found creative ways around primitive internet content blockers? It’s the same stuff all over again and I think it’s getting quite hypocritical to pretend that heavy-handed internet controls were bad for us but good for them.<p>Amazing how it comes full circle.