[HN Gopher] Arkansas: No need to age verify kids working in meat...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Arkansas: No need to age verify kids working in meat processing
       plants
        
       Author : robarr
       Score  : 57 points
       Date   : 2023-03-13 14:54 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.techdirt.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.techdirt.com)
        
       | julienfr112 wrote:
       | obvious ! meatplants working kids are poor kids. Online kids are
       | rich kids.
        
       | cosmin800 wrote:
       | Just because one wrong thing is allowed, I guess other should be?
       | Or should not?
        
       | knacky wrote:
       | AK is the abbreviation for Alaska. Should be AR for Arkansas.
        
         | bobbylarrybobby wrote:
         | Funny, based on the context I read "AK" as Arkansas. If
         | headline had mentioned oil drilling I probably would have read
         | it as Alaska.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | So many readers know neither of those abbrevs that I think we
         | should just take a prefix of the title (since it's too long to
         | make HN's 80 char limit). I've done so now.
        
         | robarr wrote:
         | OP here, I am not an US native but it still is inexcusable. I
         | cannot edit the post anymore, so thank You for posting the
         | correct abbreviation.
        
       | maxerickson wrote:
       | A problem with all of these discussions about child labor laws is
       | the huge status quo bias.
       | 
       | Like if a law isn't working to protect children, it's a good
       | thing to change it! How do we talk about that if every discussion
       | starts with how horrifying it is to change the laws that protect
       | children.
       | 
       | When I looked at the Arkansas change, it didn't really seem like
       | a big deal. Previously parents had to fill out a form and send it
       | to the state and wait for approval. A form isn't going to stop a
       | parent from describing the duties inaccurately or ensure that the
       | employer actually sticks to the description that the parents
       | agreed to. The way things go, the state agency probably felt a
       | lot of pressure to rubber stamp them. And so on.
       | 
       | I'm not sure I analyzed it well, but apparently we can't even
       | talk about it, because change is bad.
        
         | krapp wrote:
         | What do you mean we can't talk about it? You're in one of
         | numerous threads talking about it.
         | 
         | And I've seen plenty of people here argue in favor of child
         | labor, so I don't know what you're worried about.
        
       | mostertoaster wrote:
       | This could maybe interpreted as saying the online world is more
       | dangerous than a meat packing plant. That doesn't seem too far-
       | fetched.
        
         | giraffe_lady wrote:
         | Never saw the internet rip anyone's arm off damn.
        
           | frollo wrote:
           | I've seen people getting some nasty bytes from it, though
        
         | RyanHamilton wrote:
         | Can you explain your thinking? as I find this so far from
         | likely to be true that I can't understand how anyone could
         | believe that.
         | 
         | Example of one calculation method, take the probable incidents,
         | multiply the probability by the negative impact. Likelehood of
         | kid injurying themselves in a physically dangerous area, very
         | very high. Hospitals are full of kids every weekend that
         | injured themselves in their own home, negative injury likely
         | bad bruise or broken arm lasting days to weeks. Online
         | probability of harm = low. Severity of harm most likely = name
         | calling or mental bullying. Bullying impact likely low unless
         | bullies also physically live nearby which then brings it back
         | to in-person harm.
        
           | filoleg wrote:
           | > Can you explain your thinking?
           | 
           | Not the person you are asking, but I can already guess what
           | their reasoning most likely is gonna be.
           | 
           | Get a large sheet of paper and fill it with buzzwords like
           | "tiktok", "groomers", "CRT", "lgbtq propaganda", etc. Throw a
           | few darts at it, and you should get a possible semblence of
           | the reasoning I would expect the grandparent comment user to
           | give you.
           | 
           | I always try to give a poster the most charitable
           | interpretation possible and steelman their argument before
           | even considering making fun of it. But I legitimately
           | struggle to come up with any charitable interpretation of an
           | argument that claims "underage users browsing internet
           | without state-mandated age verification is more dangerous
           | than them working in a meatpacking facility or a
           | slaughterhouse".
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-13 23:03 UTC)