Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mhluongo's commentslogin

Or perhaps we should expect parents to take some responsibility for their kids' screen use?

Don't be daft. It's not the parent's responsibility to monitor and care for their kids.

How do you create new procurement pipeline and surveillance infrastructure from that?

Bingo

Ok, can you explain what that looks like in practice or is it just some abstract feel-good words?

Sure! With my kids it's meant not buying them internet-enabled devices (or disabling the internet access, eg smart TVs), only having 1 family computer in a shared space, and managing my own local network. There also aren't screens in the house through the week.

On the flip side, I let them read whatever they want, including things that are upsetting or that other parents would say aren't appropriate, and I talk to them about what they've read.

Overall, I think these policies have meant more thoughtful media consumption, and more time outside and with friends. I'm not enough of a fool to think our rules are enforced at friends' houses, but we've chosen to live in a community that's largely on the same page.

None of this stuff is easy, but as a parent, it's the job.


“But I don’t want to be a responsible parent, I want to destroy the unrestricted internet.”

Just like we destroyed unrestricted tobacco stores

Nobody has a right to unrestricted tobacco stores.

Everybody has a right to free speech, and free speech frequently requires anonymous speech. This is why the protection of journalists' sources is so important, and why principled journalists are willing to go to jail to protect them.

You yearn for the end and couldn't care less about the means. But there are also those who couldn't care less about the end, but yearn for the means.

How can you distinguish between the two? And which do you think best describes the parties behind this global push to de-anonymize the Internet?


Why don't I have a right to unrestricted tobacco stores and gambling?

Pornography is a form of speech btw.


> Why don't I have a right to unrestricted tobacco stores and gambling?

Because--unlike free speech--those are not essential to freedom and democracy.

Care to answer my questions?


I don't really see how being able to read Mein Kampf is essential to freedom and democracy.

Yes yes, the internet is tobacco, TV rots your brain, the radio pushes devil music, and the printing press gives the peasants too many dangerous ideas. Shut it all down.

You expect the average parent to outwit Meta and TikTok and their teams of psychologists scheming to get their kids attention?

The social media companies could have done the socially responsible thing a decade ago and avoided all this.


I expect them to give a shit, yeah. Just like they should care about what they read or watch, or who they hang out with.

Don't let your kids have an internet-connected phone, or keep it locked down so they don't have parasitic apps preying on their pre-frontal immaturity until they're old enough to handle it.

All of this needs to be done intentionally, of course, or it will feel like the kids are being punished. But I can't emphasize this enough... it's our job as parents to raise our kids.


They do give a shit, and that's why all these social media age laws are being passed. Representatives are actually listening to their constituents.

Again, Meta and TikTok and their ilk could have avoided all of this by just being socially responsible organizations, instead of sociopathic.


By that logic, from my perspective - your family life, as we're practicing it today, it a car without a steering wheel.

The church down the street from me, that I have nothing to do with, is a car without a steering wheel. My local town, of which I'm only 1 member, is a car without a steering wheel.

Just because you see a system that you don't understand or control doesn't mean it's dangerous. The first instinct shouldn't be to centralize power.


Hi! As someone who has historically built on libp2p, I'd love to see an updated comparison focused on app developers!

Last year, I was trying to choose between the two and went with that I know... but it feels like there's real momentum on Iroh's side.


My understanding - "insider trading" is specifically for securities, and brought by the SEC. The equivalent for commodities is called "market manipulation", brought by the CFTC. Market manipulation is a much harder thing to prove than insider trading.

This kind of reminds me of the OpenSea "insider trading" scandal. [0]

Not a lawyer, not legal advice, etc.

[0] - https://www.mayerbrown.com/en/insights/publications/2025/09/...


If you're not shipping faster, it's meaningless, and if you are, it's also bad?


If you're not shipping faster it's meaningless for the company.

And if you are, it's bad for the employee.

Is what the above comment actually said.


> if they saw me romanticizing the Mondragon cooperatives in Spain?

Speaking for myself, I'd find that very interesting! I just stumbled over an article about it a few days ago, and don't think it's weird that different parts of the world would be interested in a regional business phenomenon.


If they use the system keyring, it depends on the OS and other details - MacOS, Linux, and Windows all have different implementation tradeoffs.


Two different "rent"s.


Not really see your sibling post


When something is "realized" is a matter of accounting. It means to make the change, they sold the gold fo currrency, then bought it back. For many of us, realizing a gain is when taxes happen, though I'm not sure what it means for a nation state.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/realizedprofit.asp


So they could sell it again and buy it again and realise another $15b?


No, there wouldn't be any gains to realize — unless the gold price went up since they bought it, of course.

If you buy something for $10 and sell at $15, you realized a gain of $5. If you then buy at $15 and sell it at $15, you realized a gain of $0.


If I'm not mistaken, this was Socrates' exact perspective on writing.


>Socrates' exact perspective on writing

Again, writing replacing memorization is not a good 1:1 comparison to AI replacing technical understanding. Someone still needs to understand what is written and act upon that knowledge. That requires skill and experience in the domain they're working within.

However, a person using an AI does not need to understand the underlying problem to get results. A person can ask Claude Code to write them a web app dashboard without having ever learned JS/CSS/HTML. It does not require them to have skills within a domain.

Also, we need to be honest with ourselves. Human brains did not evolve for the instant gratification of modern technology. We've already seen what technology has done to our attention spans. I am concerned over what further reliance on technology, particularly AI, will do to our brains.


> However, a person using an AI does not need to understand the underlying problem to get results. A person can ask Claude Code to write them a web app dashboard without having ever learned JS/CSS/HTML. It does not require them to have skills within a domain.

This perspective is funny to me because of how much the modern web is already built around web developers refusing to use CSS and PHP. The giving up of the skills happened before the automation.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: