Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I was learning to program at age 11. This does indeed sound extreme.




Would it have made a big difference if you learned to code at 13? Is there a pressing need as to why kids need to code at a young age? Maybe there could be exceptions for children that develop sooner? If your other developmental metrics were met early on, I don't see why an earlier age would be a problem.

I don't know, maybe? Maybe it's not up to the state to decide whether my kids developmental metrics allows them screen time before age 13? What kind of nanny state is that?

That type of nanny state is a literal nanny state, imposing rules for children, like an actual nanny.

The usual figurative nanny state refers to a situation in which unreasonable rules and regulations are imposed on the behavior of grownups, not children.


I don't think that's a nanny state. you can't give your kid alcohol for example at that age, let them drive, get married (don't get me started on some countries!), operate a chainsaw or other dangerous machinery.

This is a danger to their mental development. Look at teacher forums all over. r/Teachers on reddit should be illuminating. Tech and parents sticking devices to their kids instead of raising them properly has resulted in utter disaster. If there was no harm imposed on children, I would agree that it is a nanny-state thing.


My kids (6 and 8) are pretty well raised I'd say, but they do have access to a Playstation and a PC, with clear rules and time limits for use. They are good at making friends and don't do trouble in school, and they also have healthy interests other than playing video games. This is because we actively raise them so they can learn to adjust their needs and interact with others, not because we limit their screen time. The problem today is that many parents seemingly does not raise their kids well, maybe because they don't spend enough time together, perhaps because the parents themselves spend their time scrolling reels.

I myself grew up with a desktop computer from around age 7 and it shaped me early on in a positive way to be curious. Computers were also a central part of my social life. There are many positive things that kids can get out of computers, so I find the comparison with alcohol to be hyperbolic.


[flagged]


I'm pretty sure that type of engagement is against HN rules.

> Would it have made a big difference if you learned X at 13?

Yes. Kids getting access to knowledge that clicks with them earlier than later makes a huge difference.

Which is exactly why so many people are rushing in to control what kids get exposed to. You seem to have pretty strong thought on the issue yourself, if you agree on the possible negative impact, you can't also deny the possibility of positive impact.

The dose makes the poison, I think we can understand how extreme position tend to bring more negative than positive consequences, regardless of the rethoric.

[edit: rephrased the last part]


I strongly suspect the network connection is the issue, not the software. Let the kids have graphing calculators!

I generally agree. But so much software today is useless without a network connection. Online help (anybody remember those chm files?) was often very very good, because it was supposed to be _the_ documentation for most software.



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

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

Search: