‘Your kids are being hurt’: He knows the harm social media does - because he helped build it
Some good thoughts on age-gating access to social media, from someone who worked at Facebook for some years and helped create it <https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360982163/your-kids-are-being-hurt-experts-plea-new-zealand-lawmakers-social-media-ban>: “I worked on newsfeed ranking, bullying and harassment, and comment ranking,” [Ravi] Iyer told Stuff. “What I learned was that you can't actually design a platform badly and then try to fix it through moderation. You actually have to design a platform better in the first place.” As for the idea that legal restrictions just drive young people to use VPNs or lie about their age or whatever, he points out that peer pressure is the main driver of behaviour, so it’s not necessary to have a 100% loophole-proof policy in order to see good results: Addressing concerns about teens bypassing potential legislation using virtual private networks (VPNs) or children being pushed to darker corners of the internet, Iyer argues that these are not reasons to delay action. He says norm changes—where children feel less social pressure to be on platforms—are already occurring, and the goal is not immediate 100% compliance. He compares the policy to drinking ages or speed limits, where partial compliance still yields significant social benefits. And yes, he has some ideas on how a platform can be better designed. His approach also has the benefit of singling out problem platforms, not by trying to say what is or isn’t a “social media” platform, but in terms of the specific characteristics that cause problems: Iyer suggests moving away from broad, purpose-based definitions and instead focusing on harmful features, such as engagement-based algorithms, infinite scroll, and "streak" gamification—where users are incentivised to return to the platform every day. Of course, such features are precisely those that maximize ad revenue for the platform companies. So don’t expect them to be happy about this kind of focus.
If stuff eg drinking, social media, lying, money, guns are not suitable for children, then maybe we shouldn't have them. Adults are far worse and far less responsible than children. But Capitalism & Democracy are the "Art Of Not Being Able To Decide What Are Good Ideas And What Aren't" On Fri, 22 May 2026, 16:54 Lawrence D'Oliveiro, <ldo@geek-central.gen.nz> wrote:
Some good thoughts on age-gating access to social media, from someone who worked at Facebook for some years and helped create it < https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360982163/your-kids-are-being-hurt-experts-p...
:
“I worked on newsfeed ranking, bullying and harassment, and comment ranking,” [Ravi] Iyer told Stuff. “What I learned was that you can't actually design a platform badly and then try to fix it through moderation. You actually have to design a platform better in the first place.”
As for the idea that legal restrictions just drive young people to use VPNs or lie about their age or whatever, he points out that peer pressure is the main driver of behaviour, so it’s not necessary to have a 100% loophole-proof policy in order to see good results:
Addressing concerns about teens bypassing potential legislation using virtual private networks (VPNs) or children being pushed to darker corners of the internet, Iyer argues that these are not reasons to delay action. He says norm changes—where children feel less social pressure to be on platforms—are already occurring, and the goal is not immediate 100% compliance. He compares the policy to drinking ages or speed limits, where partial compliance still yields significant social benefits.
And yes, he has some ideas on how a platform can be better designed. His approach also has the benefit of singling out problem platforms, not by trying to say what is or isn’t a “social media” platform, but in terms of the specific characteristics that cause problems:
Iyer suggests moving away from broad, purpose-based definitions and instead focusing on harmful features, such as engagement-based algorithms, infinite scroll, and "streak" gamification—where users are incentivised to return to the platform every day.
Of course, such features are precisely those that maximize ad revenue for the platform companies. So don’t expect them to be happy about this kind of focus. _______________________________________________ wlug mailing list -- wlug@list.wlug.org.nz To unsubscribe send an email to wlug-leave@list.wlug.org.nz
I joined StackOverflow, long before joining Facebook, when I was younger. There was spam, but, I can't remember seeing any harmful content on there. Perhaps interest based forums with levels of privilege earned through reputation points would work better. Cheers, Ben ________________________________ From: Kevin SARGENT <conaugh14@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2026 8:01 PM To: Waikato Linux Users Group <wlug@list.wlug.org.nz> Subject: [wlug] Re: ‘Your kids are being hurt’: He knows the harm social media does - because he helped build it If stuff eg drinking, social media, lying, money, guns are not suitable for children, then maybe we shouldn't have them. Adults are far worse and far less responsible than children. But Capitalism & Democracy are the "Art Of Not Being Able To Decide What Are Good Ideas And What Aren't" On Fri, 22 May 2026, 16:54 Lawrence D'Oliveiro, <ldo@geek-central.gen.nz<mailto:ldo@geek-central.gen.nz>> wrote: Some good thoughts on age-gating access to social media, from someone who worked at Facebook for some years and helped create it <https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360982163/your-kids-are-being-hurt-experts-plea-new-zealand-lawmakers-social-media-ban>: “I worked on newsfeed ranking, bullying and harassment, and comment ranking,” [Ravi] Iyer told Stuff. “What I learned was that you can't actually design a platform badly and then try to fix it through moderation. You actually have to design a platform better in the first place.” As for the idea that legal restrictions just drive young people to use VPNs or lie about their age or whatever, he points out that peer pressure is the main driver of behaviour, so it’s not necessary to have a 100% loophole-proof policy in order to see good results: Addressing concerns about teens bypassing potential legislation using virtual private networks (VPNs) or children being pushed to darker corners of the internet, Iyer argues that these are not reasons to delay action. He says norm changes—where children feel less social pressure to be on platforms—are already occurring, and the goal is not immediate 100% compliance. He compares the policy to drinking ages or speed limits, where partial compliance still yields significant social benefits. And yes, he has some ideas on how a platform can be better designed. His approach also has the benefit of singling out problem platforms, not by trying to say what is or isn’t a “social media” platform, but in terms of the specific characteristics that cause problems: Iyer suggests moving away from broad, purpose-based definitions and instead focusing on harmful features, such as engagement-based algorithms, infinite scroll, and "streak" gamification—where users are incentivised to return to the platform every day. Of course, such features are precisely those that maximize ad revenue for the platform companies. So don’t expect them to be happy about this kind of focus. _______________________________________________ wlug mailing list -- wlug@list.wlug.org.nz<mailto:wlug@list.wlug.org.nz> To unsubscribe send an email to wlug-leave@list.wlug.org.nz<mailto:wlug-leave@list.wlug.org.nz>
participants (3)
-
Ben Cottrell -
Kevin SARGENT -
Lawrence D'Oliveiro