Policies have enabled cars and airplanes to be used safely. No such policies exist for social media or AI. Progress is being made to fix this gap—beginning with protecting our kids.
how can i help North Carolina get involved in driving these policy initiatives forward, at both the grassroots and legislative/enactment levels?
i’m fairly active in the North Carolina General Assembly (not a lobbyist, just have issues specific to my family business) and in the community…
…and think there is a lot of appetite here, while noticing NC unfortunately isn’t on any of the “advancing the cause” shout-out states listed in this piece.
I'm vehemently opposed to indefinitely expanding State powers and the requisite use of force into Psyberspace as we continue to see Australia, Canada, UK and Germany sliding into soft-totalitarianism.
Why do we need to "educate lawmakers" on phone free schools? When I was a kid POGs were very popular until one kids broke a window with his metal "slammer" and the principal banned all POGs from school. Why does the Government need to get involved? When I was in sixth grade I sold whoopi cushions one day and was called into the principals office and disciplined because they aren't appropriate for the schools environment. Why wasn't my legislature involved?
It's very simple, every kid has a locker and yet we make it complicated and argue for the paternalistic interference of the State into individual families lives.
Great essay, thank you. Notably absent, however, are mentions about the imperative to educate kids about the digital environment, so they can, for example, identify addictive design or look critically at the business model. Ultimately, education can increase autonomy and self-regulation, and reduce risk. What are your thoughts on that?
The thing that strikes me most about where Jonathon Haidt is on these positions is how much they are focused on government versus parents and ultimately parents being parents.
The government does not need to mandate age restrictions on kids through technology. Parents need to develop relationships with their kids that make it so they can have productive conversations. Parents are responsible for educating their kids on the long term effects of their choices. The problem is that Parents seem to want to be their kids friend instead of their kids parent.
When my daughters were in high school, sometimes my youngest daughter didn't want to go to school. I told her that was fine. She would then need to get a job and start paying rent. The same with me paying for college. I told them if they didn't get a b average, I would not pay for college. I also only gave them $200 twice a year to get clothes. Parents would ask me how I did this, I just told them that was the rules.
Stop with making government responsible for what kids can access. Parents are responsible period. Not government. Seriously? What has this world come to?
"A primary function of government is to ensure that economic success among companies is tied to creating real value for others."
Sorry, but no.
The only way to accomplish this is for somebody to decide FOR people what value is. You might claim a majority can set values, and then impose these on others, but that might just violate some more basic American principles.
Are you suggesting that everyone, and not just children, need to be protected from social media? And by that, are you claiming that people do not have sufficient intelligence and self-control to avoid potentially self-destructive choices? And where would that role for government stop? Diet (and exercise)? Education and career choices? Social activities and organizations? Entertainment and hobbies? How about romantic partners?
Yes, keep informing people of potential consequences (bad and good) related to social media and technology. And keep promoting appropriate restrictions for use by children. But do NOT try to social-engineer all of us.
To be clear - for many, these products are not creating value as defined by the individual consumer themselves. That’s why many are trying to use them less and almost nobody is trying to use them more.
We do already restrict the sale and access of some things to kids. But we seldom eliminate something entirely in order to prevent kids from getting it, though some people have tried. And all parents will differ in what they think is appropriate for their kids.
I would encourage you to read into Amnesty’s perspective on the Australian approach. There is a very very strong argument that it violates human rights for children.
Some good ideas here, but these rules are still too destructive. Some of my best online experiences as a teenager were on sites, forums and chatrooms related to puzzles and mathematics that were not and could not have been built under your principles #1 and #3. Indeed, like almost any public webforum, they would let anyone with a valid email address register, and they had (often unpaid) moderators that would act as firemen, not as nannies. One of them (Art of Problem Solving) has since professionalized (while sadly losing some of its simplicity and user-friendliness in the process). The others still are as they used to be. A policy as wide-reaching as you suggest would probably make them all go underground in the countries it is affecting.
A lot of educational content involves creating accounts and some gamification mechanics! And much of it is non-commercializable, at least not at a scale that would pay for professional moderation and ID-checking. This reminds me of US colleges taking down lecture videos because some activist judge went after them for ADA non-compliance.
So agree with that the current social network apps are designed to steal our time and attention. I’ve felt the negative effects on myself and deleted Instagram for good. I also built a wholesome social network for habits to find quality digital connection with my friends. It’s called Calombo and available in App Store. I’ll be glad to see all people from this thread in it because I think these are the folks who are aware and mindful of where they put their attention to.
Why not change the law to make the social media platforms publishers? Ok, so it would probably put them out of business (or they’d have to screen every post and maybe refer potential posts to their lawyers) but even the users are beginning to wish these things didn’t exist. It would work wonders for our children’s mental health and for our civic discourse.
This article gives me hope and faith! I've known for years that the most informative platforms do not require users to create accounts. It is so encouraging to see others offering additional proof that this is the case.
For over a decade, I've been teaching mindful spending lessons to middle-school students so they can ENTER high school, knowing from firsthand experience that anyone can access and use financial information to improve their lives...when their money habits and beliefs are still developing. (The timing is crucial because our money habits and beliefs are established as early as age 7 and remain remarkably stable throughout our lives.)
Asking simple questions about typical purchases before you spend your money or anyone else's is the easiest way to avoid disappointment, reduce waste, improve family harmony, and protect the planet!
The free, safe, mindful spending tool that I created and introduce to students to help them answer the question "Should I buy this item or experience?" (in mindful spending lessons) is called the DIMS-DOES IT MAKE SENSE? SCORE Calculator. The calculator has been available to young people WITHOUT registration or a paywall since its inception. Why? Because it was designed to create long-term value, rather than maximize time spent using the calculator. The tool was purpose-built to foster slower, more deliberate thinking about youthful consumer decisions, leading to fewer, higher-quality spending decisions. It does one thing well: it engagingly imprints the powerful habit of thinking before buying. Thinking before buying only takes minutes, but can spare a young person and their family days, weeks, months, and sometimes even years of disappointment and waste!
(The DIMS SCORE Calculator is housed in the early financial education nonprofit organization GiftingSense.org.)
"Policies have enabled cars and airplanes to be used safely."
I dare anyone to look at plots of accident and fatality rates over the past century, and point at where safety policies kicked in and made a big difference.
how can i help North Carolina get involved in driving these policy initiatives forward, at both the grassroots and legislative/enactment levels?
i’m fairly active in the North Carolina General Assembly (not a lobbyist, just have issues specific to my family business) and in the community…
…and think there is a lot of appetite here, while noticing NC unfortunately isn’t on any of the “advancing the cause” shout-out states listed in this piece.
Can you email policy at anxiousgeneration.com? Would be glad to connect you as there are efforts in many states we didn’t mention including in NC
Would like to interview you for my bulwark podcast on this topic
I'm vehemently opposed to indefinitely expanding State powers and the requisite use of force into Psyberspace as we continue to see Australia, Canada, UK and Germany sliding into soft-totalitarianism.
Why do we need to "educate lawmakers" on phone free schools? When I was a kid POGs were very popular until one kids broke a window with his metal "slammer" and the principal banned all POGs from school. Why does the Government need to get involved? When I was in sixth grade I sold whoopi cushions one day and was called into the principals office and disciplined because they aren't appropriate for the schools environment. Why wasn't my legislature involved?
It's very simple, every kid has a locker and yet we make it complicated and argue for the paternalistic interference of the State into individual families lives.
Great essay, thank you. Notably absent, however, are mentions about the imperative to educate kids about the digital environment, so they can, for example, identify addictive design or look critically at the business model. Ultimately, education can increase autonomy and self-regulation, and reduce risk. What are your thoughts on that?
The thing that strikes me most about where Jonathon Haidt is on these positions is how much they are focused on government versus parents and ultimately parents being parents.
The government does not need to mandate age restrictions on kids through technology. Parents need to develop relationships with their kids that make it so they can have productive conversations. Parents are responsible for educating their kids on the long term effects of their choices. The problem is that Parents seem to want to be their kids friend instead of their kids parent.
When my daughters were in high school, sometimes my youngest daughter didn't want to go to school. I told her that was fine. She would then need to get a job and start paying rent. The same with me paying for college. I told them if they didn't get a b average, I would not pay for college. I also only gave them $200 twice a year to get clothes. Parents would ask me how I did this, I just told them that was the rules.
Stop with making government responsible for what kids can access. Parents are responsible period. Not government. Seriously? What has this world come to?
"A primary function of government is to ensure that economic success among companies is tied to creating real value for others."
Sorry, but no.
The only way to accomplish this is for somebody to decide FOR people what value is. You might claim a majority can set values, and then impose these on others, but that might just violate some more basic American principles.
Are you suggesting that everyone, and not just children, need to be protected from social media? And by that, are you claiming that people do not have sufficient intelligence and self-control to avoid potentially self-destructive choices? And where would that role for government stop? Diet (and exercise)? Education and career choices? Social activities and organizations? Entertainment and hobbies? How about romantic partners?
Yes, keep informing people of potential consequences (bad and good) related to social media and technology. And keep promoting appropriate restrictions for use by children. But do NOT try to social-engineer all of us.
To be clear - for many, these products are not creating value as defined by the individual consumer themselves. That’s why many are trying to use them less and almost nobody is trying to use them more.
Then those people are making adult decisions and choosing what is best for themselves, no government required.
And how about for kids?
Your kids, my kids, or all kids?
We do already restrict the sale and access of some things to kids. But we seldom eliminate something entirely in order to prevent kids from getting it, though some people have tried. And all parents will differ in what they think is appropriate for their kids.
I would encourage you to read into Amnesty’s perspective on the Australian approach. There is a very very strong argument that it violates human rights for children.
Some good ideas here, but these rules are still too destructive. Some of my best online experiences as a teenager were on sites, forums and chatrooms related to puzzles and mathematics that were not and could not have been built under your principles #1 and #3. Indeed, like almost any public webforum, they would let anyone with a valid email address register, and they had (often unpaid) moderators that would act as firemen, not as nannies. One of them (Art of Problem Solving) has since professionalized (while sadly losing some of its simplicity and user-friendliness in the process). The others still are as they used to be. A policy as wide-reaching as you suggest would probably make them all go underground in the countries it is affecting.
A lot of educational content involves creating accounts and some gamification mechanics! And much of it is non-commercializable, at least not at a scale that would pay for professional moderation and ID-checking. This reminds me of US colleges taking down lecture videos because some activist judge went after them for ADA non-compliance.
So agree with that the current social network apps are designed to steal our time and attention. I’ve felt the negative effects on myself and deleted Instagram for good. I also built a wholesome social network for habits to find quality digital connection with my friends. It’s called Calombo and available in App Store. I’ll be glad to see all people from this thread in it because I think these are the folks who are aware and mindful of where they put their attention to.
Why not change the law to make the social media platforms publishers? Ok, so it would probably put them out of business (or they’d have to screen every post and maybe refer potential posts to their lawyers) but even the users are beginning to wish these things didn’t exist. It would work wonders for our children’s mental health and for our civic discourse.
Is it possible to collaborate on this since I'm an AI researcher, coming from the governance perspective?
This article gives me hope and faith! I've known for years that the most informative platforms do not require users to create accounts. It is so encouraging to see others offering additional proof that this is the case.
For over a decade, I've been teaching mindful spending lessons to middle-school students so they can ENTER high school, knowing from firsthand experience that anyone can access and use financial information to improve their lives...when their money habits and beliefs are still developing. (The timing is crucial because our money habits and beliefs are established as early as age 7 and remain remarkably stable throughout our lives.)
Asking simple questions about typical purchases before you spend your money or anyone else's is the easiest way to avoid disappointment, reduce waste, improve family harmony, and protect the planet!
The free, safe, mindful spending tool that I created and introduce to students to help them answer the question "Should I buy this item or experience?" (in mindful spending lessons) is called the DIMS-DOES IT MAKE SENSE? SCORE Calculator. The calculator has been available to young people WITHOUT registration or a paywall since its inception. Why? Because it was designed to create long-term value, rather than maximize time spent using the calculator. The tool was purpose-built to foster slower, more deliberate thinking about youthful consumer decisions, leading to fewer, higher-quality spending decisions. It does one thing well: it engagingly imprints the powerful habit of thinking before buying. Thinking before buying only takes minutes, but can spare a young person and their family days, weeks, months, and sometimes even years of disappointment and waste!
(The DIMS SCORE Calculator is housed in the early financial education nonprofit organization GiftingSense.org.)
"Policies have enabled cars and airplanes to be used safely."
I dare anyone to look at plots of accident and fatality rates over the past century, and point at where safety policies kicked in and made a big difference.
The FAA has been proving it is incapable of enforcing its own rules.