Roblox is a problem but it's a symptom of something worse
134 points
3 hours ago
| 24 comments
| platformer.news
| HN
Recent and related: Roblox CEO interview about child safety didn't go well - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46013477 - Nov 2025 (96 comments)
bmurphy1976
3 hours ago
[-]
It's a nightmare managing all this stuff. Roblox, Minecraft, Meta Quest services, Fortnite, the list goes on and on. These companies are not helping us either.

Thankfully my son and his friends have somehow iterated away from Fortnite. It's no longer cool so they just stopped playing it. That's one less thing I have to worry about.

reply
cogogo
2 minutes ago
[-]
Agree massive headache. Our kids go to the boys and girls club after school where they were playing roblox during computer time. Some parents apparently complained and it’s now banned. Not sure of that is local or nation-wide. They were kind of annoyed but they seem to understand why. I am definitely worried about giving them the tools they need to navigate the online jungle when they are older.
reply
massysett
3 hours ago
[-]
I let my kid play Roblox for a couple of weeks and I was absolutely horrified by all the inducements to seek Robux. So I removed it from her iPad, which is locked down.

She gets along just fine without Roblox.

reply
ryanjshaw
2 hours ago
[-]
I play Roblox with my daughter from time to time and we have lots of fun. I’ve explained the dangers to her (strangers messaging, gambling style games, etc), and I see it as an opportunity to teach her while she still listens to me. When she’s older and I’m not privy to everything she does on a computer I don’t want her stumbling across these things uninformed.

A portion of her pocket money goes to Robux, which she saves up for special outfits (eg halloween) or creatures in her favorite game about birds. No different from the hobbies many adults have - except I use it as a teaching opportunity about saving, buyer’s remorse etc., again while she’s still young and listening.

reply
Nextgrid
1 hour ago
[-]
The problem is that just like boycotts/individual action doesn't work (besides a handful of lucky exceptions), this won't work either if all your kids' peers are on it. Being the "odd one out" brings its own share of problems, especially in a volatile environment where any pretext for bullying is a good one.

This is why we need regulation. Both for child-focused platforms, but also for adults (regarding social media).

reply
in_cahoots
28 minutes ago
[-]
I agree mostly. But I would push back on the idea that you need to let your child do whatever (play on Roblox, get fancy clothes or toys, etc) because of bullying. You're trading one set of potential problems for another set of known problems, and letting your own fears dictate how you raise your kids. How do you expect your kids to stand up to peer pressure as teenagers if you give into their peers when they are younger?

I get it. We all look back at the pain from our childhoods and try to shield our kids from that pain. But unless you want your kid to be average in every way there's going to be a chance of bullying. Focus on building a strong relationship with them so that you can guide them through it if it happens.

reply
watwut
1 hour ago
[-]
Roblox is popular precisely because majority of kids play it for free without buying Robux.
reply
bdangubic
4 minutes ago
[-]
nothing is free… :)
reply
acedTrex
3 hours ago
[-]
Whats wrong with Minecraft, that seems like an odd inclusion in the list?
reply
ACCount37
2 hours ago
[-]
Minecraft by itself is benign, but online servers? Oh boy.

Full tilt P2W servers, ran by low key cybercriminals, with I Can't Believe It's Not Gambling mechanics targeting children. And Mojang itself is adding fuel to the fire by selling paid mods - for Bedrock only, which is the version most children play.

Then there's the usual boon of online gaming - getting to interact with the shadiest characters you've ever met online.

reply
snapcaster
1 hour ago
[-]
I don't really understand why those things are bad? Making your server executable available for dedicated servers is common (and good!) and selling paid mods just seems like selling software to me

edit: the private server operators might be bad, but I don't see how this is Minecraft's fault (or how it doesn't apply to every game that allows dedicated servers)

reply
jvanderbot
40 minutes ago
[-]
> Minecraft itself is benign

So, I dont think anyone said it was their fault, just that it's being exploited.

reply
recursive
1 hour ago
[-]
What's wrong with paid mods?
reply
prophesi
1 hour ago
[-]
Not OP, but for me I'm wary whenever I see in-game currency (Minecoins). Thankfully there are no gambling mechanics tied in to Minecoins directly, but the server ecosystem is still rampant with gambling just the same[0].

[0] https://feedback.minecraft.net/hc/en-us/community/posts/3600...

reply
recursive
3 minutes ago
[-]
I agree regarding in-game currency. I find it distasteful. But in my mind, paid mods are a different thing that can exist independently. I don't find those distasteful. I find their existence slightly positive.
reply
jay_kyburz
40 minutes ago
[-]
I was fine with Minecraft until the kids started wanting to install all kinds of mods, which as far as I know are random executables you download from shady websites.
reply
Spivak
3 hours ago
[-]
There is Minecraft the standalone game that you play either by yourself or on a private server with friends you know IRL. That's totally fine.

Then there is the wider Minecraft community based on a constellation of public and semi-public servers. This is a lot more like Roblox.

reply
LeifCarrotson
46 minutes ago
[-]
The Minecraft you know and love is a fantastic game, especially for kids. Top 10 all time, IMO, in terms of creativity and education and development. And you can easily set up a personal friends and family server/realm, and there are tons of free mods and maps.

The problem is that malicious actors can build Roblox in anything. It's not hard to get kids hooked and begging their parents for lucrative in-game gambling currency.

reply
oezi
27 minutes ago
[-]
I am probably not the right generation but all attempts to engage with Minecraft with my children have always ended badly. It seems very tedious and clunky. The learning curve seems steeper than playing factorio casually.
reply
hedora
50 minutes ago
[-]
Microsoft forces login these days for single player play, and jams ads, social networking crap.

As a parent, I don’t have time for this bullshit, and assume they have malicious intentions. Also, at least once, there was some warning about a profanity filter that my kid dismissed without reading. It’s tied to my MS account, and only a matter of time before that is tied to github and linkedin.

So the kid says “doodie head” one too many times, and what, I lose my windows login / bitlocker key, gh repos and professional network?

Screw it.

reply
autoexec
27 minutes ago
[-]
Exactly, everything wrong with Minecraft started with Microsoft. They took a fun, harmless, and free game so that they could profit from it and they've been working at making it increasingly harmful ever since.
reply
dwattttt
27 minutes ago
[-]
Have you considered not tying your encryption keys to your child's online activities? I can understand the thrill of danger, but I'm not that much of a gambler myself.
reply
mock-possum
3 hours ago
[-]
just another surface for predators to access underage targets. I guess one thing with Minecraft specifically is there’s a veneer of positive / educational content to smuggle that access beneath - schools have lessons that include Minecraft play, you don’t get that with Fortnite or Roblox, so it seems more ‘innocent.’

Fortnite is about killing eachother, Roblox is about literally anything, Minecraft is about… well, mining and crafting, mostly.

But really, with mods, it can be just as ‘anything’ as Roblox, only with possibly less scrutiny.

Idk. I love Minecraft, for the record. It’s just the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the popular online game that provides access to kids gets the creeps.

reply
bstsb
2 hours ago
[-]
where would creeps even contact kids on Minecraft? the only officially sanctioned servers are on Bedrock and tightly moderated, everything else is plastered with Microsoft-sanctioned warnings about unmoderated play
reply
sergent_moon
2 hours ago
[-]
And the one things kids avoid, without prejudice, is unmoderated play.
reply
fhd2
3 hours ago
[-]
What's wrong with Minecraft? I'm not exactly a Microsoft fan, but am pretty impressed with how little control they have so far exerted over Java Edition, they even made modding easier recently by removing obfuscation. You can run your own server as much as you want with no fees, obligations or anything. And unless the kids know a server address, they can't easily join some third party server with weird stuff going on. Not that I ever heard of one of those, but I'm sure they must exist.

Roblox is a dystopian nightmare in comparison.

reply
Nextgrid
1 hour ago
[-]
As others have said there's a big difference between the Minecraft "we" (the tech community growing up on Beta versions of Minecraft) know and the Minecraft of today.

The subsequent versions also developed the game mechanics a lot to turn it into something closer to an RPG than the early, bare-bones sandbox game with minimal, well-understood mechanics and the rest purely up to the players' creativity.

There's nowadays an abundance of Pay-to-Win servers with custom mechanics to enable that, and I'm sure a lot of unsavory people preying on children. The social media (YouTube/etc) community around it has exploded too in a way I don't recall it before (I used to be into Minecraft videos back in the ~2012 era, and what I see nowadays grosses me out in comparison).

reply
pjmlp
3 hours ago
[-]
Epic made a deal with Unity, apparently they intend to work around stores by turning Fortnite into a game store.
reply
socalgal2
1 hour ago
[-]
Do you have link? How does Unity make money running in Fornite which uses Unreal?
reply
pjmlp
59 minutes ago
[-]
See Unite 2025 keynote, also https://www.epicgames.com/site/en-US/news/unity-and-epic-gam...

Unity makes money as usual, the people doing those games pay their professional licenses to Unity.

reply
andsoitis
3 hours ago
[-]
what have they replaced Fortnite with? more physical play or something digital?
reply
Pet_Ant
3 hours ago
[-]
Physical play is nigh impossible. It means getting other kid's parents to let them out. And then you need to spend your full-time supervising them. Can't just let them out with their bikes on the streets.

I think the problem is that either you can give children freedom to explore the world, or you can make them accountable for their actions. Can't have both, and parents will protect their kids by not letting them get into trouble.

reply
coryrc
2 hours ago
[-]
reply
wartywhoa23
2 hours ago
[-]
I'd been riding bikes with my friends around the block since the age of 6. Parents didn't chase us around and minded their own business instead of nanomanaging us into absolute snowflakes that modern children have become. We played tag at building sites, jumping gaps meter wide and five deep, made explosives out of match sticks, bolts and nuts, and showed up at home just to check in and have a quick lunch. We did a bunch more things many parents would deem insane these days (and even our own, should they know)...

And yet every single one of my friends managed to survive this now-impossible freedom and came into adulthood with a bunch of wonderful warm memories of our childhoods, free of any stigmas or psychological trumas.

This modern fear-based attitude towards childhood is beyond sick.

Now before anyone says "but pedophiles and terrorists" - mind you, that was 80's USSR, Chikatilo had still been at large, the gossip was there but wasn't amplified enough to put everyone into scared trance like modern mass-media does.

Literally nothing has changed in the society since then, maniacs were around just like they are now, but the attitude towards the outside world has been so blown out of proportion today, that parents are eager to outsource the upbringing to strangers in online games out of fear of strangers and dangers outside.

reply
deltoidmaximus
49 minutes ago
[-]
> that parents are eager to outsource the upbringing to strangers in online games out of fear of strangers and dangers outside.

There's a lot of blame for parents, much of it deserved. But when you have CPS being called for kids playing in the woods or parents charged with manslaughter when some one else runs over their kid you realize this is now going against the grain to resist this stuff.

reply
watwut
1 hour ago
[-]
> We played tag at building sites, jumping gaps meter wide and five deep, made explosives out of match sticks

As someone who thinks kids should have freedom, like kids in Germany or Japan have, I hate it when ridiculous arguments like these show up.

Look, if you was regularly doing all that, you probably should not have all that freedom. But, most kids are actually more reasonable, if raised right.

reply
wartywhoa23
1 hour ago
[-]
What problem with me as I am now would you solve if you had any power to prevent me from being a kid and doing pretty common things kids were doing then?

See, neither me nor any of my friends became terrorist bombers, heck, there is not even a single stuntman around us! On the contrary, that unimaginably dangerous activity in our childhood raised responsibility in us better than any supervision. We knew what we did. No amount of nannying will fix kids who lack the touch with the harsh reality, as it takes feeling some pain sometimes to be responsible and not inflict pain on others.

reply
pixl97
15 minutes ago
[-]
Cool, stop everyone else from being a nanny then. You pull the stuff you and I did as kids in most places now and you'll have the police and CPS show up.
reply
foobarian
1 hour ago
[-]
> made explosives out of match sticks, bolts and nuts

I used to do similar crazy things, had this friend who liked to play a kind of a game of chicken with an M-80, see who will hold on to it the longest. He would've been 45 years old today. /s

reply
wartywhoa23
52 minutes ago
[-]
My elder brother would be 47 this year should he not die aged 2 of sudden acute disease that doctors of that day and place couldn't stop. What's your point?
reply
dwattttt
12 minutes ago
[-]
That "things were better in the old days, all this safety culture is pointless" overlooks the tragedies we became inured to back in those days?

I cannot count the number of times I've heard "we never bothered with that" with things like refrigerating leftovers, and its unspoken rider of "and it was fine" is never followed up with "look how foodborne illnesses are rising, or at least not dropping". Very curious.

reply
worldsavior
3 hours ago
[-]
Thankfully? Why don't you just forbid him to play Fortnite? Sounds like your son doesn't listen to you, and that's a problem.
reply
uniq7
3 hours ago
[-]
Has an authority ever forbid you to do something and you still did it?

If so, was it a problem that you didn't listen?

I'm not a parent, but fortnite is not like smoking or drugs, common. If you don't let kids grow over this kind of bad content, they will never become good discriminators.

reply
worldsavior
24 minutes ago
[-]
If they grow on it they will normalize this bad content. If someone didn't grow on Fortnite and then hear somebody wastes 6h a day on Fortnite, they will think "this guy is nuts".
reply
coryrc
2 hours ago
[-]
Schools are the problem. Hear me out.

Schools group together only one age of kid for socialization and only 20-30 of them. If your kid is not into the same thing as enough of the other kids in that group, they will likely be ostracized, even unintentionally. So you must let your kid do the things their friends do.

Broader society does not restrict the age of who you can socialize with. My friends vary in age quite a bit. My friend's kid can play with my kid despite being a different age, but that's much less than the 30 hours a week spent in school.

reply
worldsavior
15 minutes ago
[-]
If the all class plays Fortnite and that is the only way they get socialized, his parents should consider moving him to another school. Many kids don't play this kind of stuff and actually prefer hanging out.

This kind of approach is also invalid. So what everyone plays Fortnite? There are many places to get socialized with other kids. The kid likes basketball? Sign him up to a basketball team; he likes to play music? Sign him to some band; etc. Kids shouldn't surrender to peer pressure.

I agree schools are also a problem, but not the main problem.

reply
dave_sid
3 hours ago
[-]
Victorian Dad is on HN
reply
recursive
1 hour ago
[-]
My money's on non-dad.
reply
thinkingtoilet
36 minutes ago
[-]
People are downvoting this but it's the correct response. I will never worry about Roblox because my child will never be able to play it at home. Problem solved. I understand that maybe non-technical people might not know to think about these things, but in this crowd this response should be the most upvoted. These things are poinsons. Don't feed your children poison. It's pretty simple. "They'll be left out!" Good! While other children consume poison my child will be left out from consuming poison.
reply
pixl97
13 minutes ago
[-]
They'll still play it with their friends at school.
reply
foota
56 minutes ago
[-]
It's interesting to me to think about a possible system where people in say roblox can only chat with each other by exchanging physical keys somehow. This way, they would be able to chat with their peers from school etc., without the danger or need for as much supervision.

I don't necessarily think this is technologically feasible or something that would be accepted, but I think it's an interesting idea.

reply
darth_avocado
35 minutes ago
[-]
That’s pretty much the antithesis of online gaming. You’re not ONLY playing with other kids you know.

Edit: There’s two problems that need to be solved. Parents need to not offload all their responsibilities to a multibillion dollar corporation and hope it works 100% of the time. And corporations need to prioritize safety more than they do now. It dumbfounds me how many times I get called the N word on Xbox and nothing happens after I report it. It’s almost 2026, it’s not that hard people.

reply
robot-wrangler
1 minute ago
[-]
What important aspects of gameplay are destroyed by age-restricting DMs?
reply
hedora
15 minutes ago
[-]
This would be trivial to implement well. Give the parents a console where they can paste in usernames. Most classes already have parents whatsapp groups or similar, so it’s easy enough to broadcast the usernames, or create a shared google doc.

Console access could also be required to create new accounts. The article says it is currently trivial for kids to just create an adult account and bypass all the parental controls.

reply
autoexec
23 minutes ago
[-]
Nintendo kind of tried that with "friend codes" but they were just annoying and spread online anyway, which is kind of fair since today it's not uncommon for people to be friends with people in distant places and the internet should allow us to be able to connect and play with each other no matter where we are.

The original solution to just playing with local friends was LAN parties, but private servers were great too where they were actually private/hosted entirely by the players and not just part of some corporation's online platform.

reply
interloxia
47 minutes ago
[-]
They could sell custom ubikeys/whatever. Kids love Tonies. A custom USB stick/NFC/air tag would be "easy" and profitable.
reply
d_sem
1 hour ago
[-]
I think the primary issue is that there is massive demand for adolescent social interaction in a world that is increasingly physically isolating for kids.

Demographic shifts make suburban families too sparse to support children friend groups. Denser cities are increasingly financially impossible for families to move in.

reply
whyenot
1 hour ago
[-]
I suspect that helicopter parenting is a much larger contributor than physical isolation. We have had sparse suburbs in the US since at least the 1950s, and generations of kids grew up in that environment and did just fine.
reply
pixl97
10 minutes ago
[-]
1950s was the baby boom so is not a great example. Children per adult has been falling ever since and suburban areas growing.
reply
bongodongobob
1 hour ago
[-]
It's definitely this. I live in one of the safest cities in the country, in the Midwest. The other day on some local Facebook group, I saw a mom trying to find someone to pick up her kids from middle school and elementary school every day. It was a 10 and 5 minute walk respectively that EVERYONE in that neighborhood took 30 years ago. No busy streets, nothing. Sidewalks and everything. Absolutely insane.
reply
syntaxing
1 hour ago
[-]
Ehh, I grew up in the suburbs in the 90s. We were fine. I would hang out with the neighborhood kids unsupervised all day long even when I was single digits old. The issue is with American culture and how it shifted into a low trust society.
reply
jaredklewis
1 hour ago
[-]
I think the parent is saying what you had is now not possible, because the neighbors don’t have kids. I’m in the burbs. Nearest kid is 4 door downs. Nearest kid the same age as my kid is two blocks over. Most people are 60+.

Anecdata but I think this is what the parent comment is asserting anyway.

reply
darth_avocado
30 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah, homeownership within young families is ridiculously out of reach, which makes “young suburbs” a difficult thing to maintain. Anecdotally, we are a young family and there’s very few other ones in the neighborhood that are in the similar boat as us.

As compared to what I heard from the older neighbors, when they had kids, all the others around also had kids. So many in fact that all the neighbors had doors in their backyards that opened into all the other neighbors yards, so the kids would just run around without having to go into the streets.

reply
endymion-light
3 hours ago
[-]
I looked at Roblox recently as a nostalgia trip as I was active in the community over a decade ago when I was a kid.

Genuinely insane that it's legal. Full dark gambling patterns, insane access. I think the only reason it's not been regulated is that people haven't looked closely, but it's as if someone took the worst of gacha games and decided to base their childrens platform on it.

reply
parasubvert
2 hours ago
[-]
Tbh making Roblox illegal feels like the same moral panic that our parents had around metal music, hip-hop, and arcades.

My kid plays Roblox, I prevent her from talking to others, and I police the Robux purchases. It really is a fun platform. The problem is for parents that aren't technical, or are negligent and don't know how to police it.

reply
s1mplicissimus
1 hour ago
[-]
I think parents (not fully unfoundedly) expect more of a playground experience from something advertised as a "game for children", so for them it follows that they should precisely not have to manually police it.
reply
feydaykyn
56 minutes ago
[-]
Don't be so dismissive! In practice...

- You cannot prevent your child to login and play at least 15mn (without manually resetting the password in the kid account) - combine this with the fact you cannot prevent changing the password reset email on the child account, and in practice you cannot prevent your child from using roblox - You cannot prevent gift card to be used - There's no way to trace gift cards usage at all - Roblox will remove controls at some ages without warning you - Deleting your kid account is a fight (it's been two weeks and roblox is asking me proof of ownership I cannot give since they don't exist) - You cannot prevent fear of missing out - You cannot control pay to win games - You cannot prevent your child face to be scanned and shared for "age control" - Same for your own face - Probably more...

Oh and don't forget there's absolutely no way to prevent your kid to have multiple accounts, and have a parallel life you know nothing about.

reply
AlecSchueler
1 hour ago
[-]
> Tbh making Roblox illegal feels like the same moral panic that our parents had around metal music, hip-hop, and arcades.

I feel like this argument has become a cliche in itself. Sometimes things are worth panicking about, and limiting access to things like cigarettes or gambling for children has been a real benefit to society. The same could be true for the dark patterns listed above.

reply
WesleyJohnson
1 hour ago
[-]
It goes beyond that though. There are games and in-game content that aren't being reviewed. There are claims of player skins where the characters are wearing a t-shirt with an actual photo of Charlie Kirk's death (the shot to the neck).

Anyone can make a Roblox game and publish it, and there doesn't seem to be a lot of moderations or verification going on. And you don't need to "talk", voice or text. You can emote, type on signs, and communicate in other ways.

reply
foobarian
1 hour ago
[-]
> I prevent her from talking to others,

Honestly the voice comms have been a nice upgrade and I find I mind it a lot less than text. It's a lot easier to confirm the person on the other side is not some middle aged creep. It's also a lot more ergonomic for talking with friends (though they already tend to use facetime calls in the background)

reply
endymion-light
1 hour ago
[-]
I mean, gambling for underage children is already illegal due to a myriad of reasons. I'd argue the psychological design of gacha games should be limited. Building patterns that get adults addicted, and advertising them specifically to children is the problem.

In the same way if a casino advertised child roulette wheels, I'd want legislation to step in.

reply
Ekaros
1 hour ago
[-]
I would not be against banning sale of any type of mystery or lootbox mechanics to those under age of 18. Including all digital and physical products. Yes, some things will be lost, but I think it will be for better.
reply
herbst
3 hours ago
[-]
I am watching YouTubers showing these things for years to the public. Somehow people don't really seem to care at all.

Roblox is really really weird.

reply
Delphiza
1 hour ago
[-]
I try to comment on Roblox whenever it comes up as my daughter was pulled into a grooming pedo gang through Roblox.

Read some of the comments from a HN thread from 3 years ago where HN parents insist that they are able to properly educate and self-censor. Enough people don't care (enough), despite Roblox being called out all the time by people with big platforms.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32014754#32015542

I am shocked that Roblox has not been shut down, not by regulators, but by parents flat-out denying access. All evidence suggests that yes, it is that bad.

reply
fragmede
3 hours ago
[-]
> Somehow people don't really seem to care at all.

> I am watching YouTubers showing these things for years to the public.

I'm confused, aren't "YouTubers who make videos about the problem" people? They seem to care so much that they've put money, time, and energy into creating videos illustrating the problem.

reply
lenerdenator
1 hour ago
[-]
They're people, but they're not politicians or regulators with the ability to do anything about it.

At a certain point, you need to have a statute that says "thou shalt not offer cybersex and online gambling to children", and you need someone with the statutory authority to charge Roblox with doing so and penalize them after due process. Either we don't have that statute, or the people with the statutory authority don't enforce things like they should.

reply
socalgal2
1 hour ago
[-]
> you need someone with the statutory authority to charge Roblox

Roblox didn't put up the content. Some user did. The user should be charged.

reply
andrewmutz
1 hour ago
[-]
Why is it a societal issue rather than just a parenting issue? Just don't let your kids play roblox. It's what I do and it works fine.
reply
endymion-light
1 hour ago
[-]
I mean, if someone was on a street corner selling child friendly cigarettes, I wouldn't call that a parenting issue.

I think parenting is one aspect, but surely you see how given it's a platform that advertises itself specifically for children, in the same way as if there was a children channel on the TV telling your kids to smoke crack, maybe someone should step in

reply
socalgal2
1 hour ago
[-]
Yea, we'd charge the person on the corner selling the cigarettes. We wouldn't sue the city for selling cigarettes just because it happened in the city, even if the person selling them paid their taxes (so the city made money on it).
reply
Delphiza
1 hour ago
[-]
We would expect the 'city' to police the illegal cigarette sellers, and vote them out if they didn't.
reply
nickthegreek
1 hour ago
[-]
As a society, we limit children's access to predatory stuff all the time - porn, alcohol, cigarettes, gambling/lottery, guns, even swear words on the public airwaves.
reply
ecommerceguy
1 hour ago
[-]
I was surprised to see a children's game is publicly traded. So there is no real incentive to protect children, just max extract as much money as possible.
reply
geephroh
3 hours ago
[-]
If you haven't listened to the interview[1], it's is absolutely bananas. Baszucki might want to think about dialing back on the ketamine a bit.

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/21/podcasts/hardfork-roblox-...

reply
api
3 hours ago
[-]
I do legit wonder about K abuse in this whole crowd.

Anyone hear any excerpts from Thiel’s Antichrist lectures? I’ve never been on the same page as him politically but this wasn’t “wow I really disagree” material. This was “are you… okay, man?” material. It was just askew and bizarre. I’m not a big Thunberg fan either but I cannot replicate the thought process that would lead to mentioning her as a potential Antichrist prototype. And that wasn’t even the weirdest thing, just the easiest to explain.

One thing I learned way back in college: if someone seems like they are on drugs, they may be on drugs.

Either that or these guys are in some weird echo chambers.

reply
ngriffiths
2 hours ago
[-]
Am I the only one who was really underwhelmed? I saw that it was supposedly a very tense trainwreck situation and sure, it gets sarcastic and stuff, but most of it was

Interviewer: "so I heard you were/are doing a bad job with moderation"

CEO: repeats banal PR talking point for the 10th time

Repeat.

I mean, at no point did the CEO say anything interesting about the moderation problem or what they are doing. The interviewers seem too skeptical to be genuinely interested. He explains to them that cost =/= quality and that 2016 =/= 2025 for what feels like an eternity. I was bored.

reply
stego-tech
15 minutes ago
[-]
> Over and over again, we have seen leaders in Baszucki's position choose growth over guardrails. Safety features come out years after the need for them is identified, if at all. Internal critics are sidelined, laid off, or managed out. And when journalists ask, politely but insistently, why so many of their users are suffering, executives laugh and tell us that we're the crazy ones.

Definitely the larger vibe in tech at the moment. Safety is overwhelmingly not a priority, anywhere, to any leader, no matter how loudly specific proponents scream that "ahkshually, it is."

Thing is, I taste the Kool-Aid each company offers. From tiny businesses to a household name SV enterprise, I give each the benefit of the doubt that this time, they're doing things right. This time, they're taking safety seriously. This time, they care about their employees. I really, truly, sincerely tried giving them all the benefit of the doubt that they see things I don't.

After this past forced career change, I finally gave up that exercise in futility. Actions speak infinitely louder than words, and taking stock of the actions of these people reveal their true intentions every time: as much money as possible for them, fuck everyone else.

reply
ghusto
1 hour ago
[-]
I check out my kids screen every so often to see what what he's really up to. After the panic of recent weeks, I looked more closely at Roblox, and spoke to my kid about it.

It could very well be that I'm being naive, or even stupid, but from what I could see the panic is coming from parents who don't feel like being parents. That is to say, they think the world should be safe for their kids, with no actual responsibility required from them to educate and engage with their own children.

reply
tschellenbach
39 minutes ago
[-]
Feels like this should be solved at the iOS/Android/Windows/Sony level. Parents should configure settings in 1 place. Not once for each game.
reply
ch2026
37 minutes ago
[-]
How is an OS setting going to protect a child from the realities that people on the internet, especially anonymous people, may be creepy?
reply
jswelker
2 hours ago
[-]
Parents do need to be more involved in keeping kids off this stuff. But it is going to be a lot easier to coerce a handful of exploitative companies to clean up their acts than to coerce millions of individuals parents to do better.
reply
parasubvert
2 hours ago
[-]
Same as it always was. Reminds me of Tipper Gore with the panic to put explicit lyrics labels on records.
reply
throwaway_4566
1 hour ago
[-]
Anyone not thinking it's that bad, watch the following. Here's a single example of a perpatrator that got away with it for too long. He admits to "contacting four to five children every day for the past year."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zD1LM8E-y8

reply
dimal
2 hours ago
[-]
Hmm. This was on the front page, generating lots of discussion. Now it’s hidden. What’s up HN? How is this not a relevant article here?
reply
roadside_picnic
1 hour ago
[-]
HN is heavily biased towards silencing any content that makes any subset of its readership uncomfortable. This policy exists under the mistaken (I hope) assumption that silence is not fundamentally biased, which is usually not the case.

Posts about climate change, Israel/Palestine, uncomfortable concerns about the state of the industry etc will very often disappear quickly once they hit the home page.

Of course silence about climate change is beneficial for those contributing the most to it, silence about Israel/Palestine is very beneficial to Israel, and clearly silence about lack of concern for child safety by major tech companies benefits those companies.

reply
AznHisoka
1 hour ago
[-]
I think they have some of algorithm that pushes down articles with too high a comment/upvote ratio
reply
parasubvert
2 hours ago
[-]
it usually devolves into a mess of a comments section because it's about freedom vs. control / moral panic vs. apathy.
reply
autoexec
47 minutes ago
[-]
> Given a chance to display empathy for the victims of crimes his platform enabled, or to convey regret about historical safety lapses, or even just to gesture at some sense of responsibility for the hundreds of millions of children who in various ways are depending on him, the CEO throws up his hands and asks: how long are you guys going to be going on about all this stuff?

CEOs acting like selfish psychopaths indifferent to the suffering of others shouldn't really surprise anyone at this point. Why expect tech CEOs to act differently? Of course he's nothing but annoyed that people keep complaining about how his digital child casino allows pedophiles and corporate advertisers to prey on children without oversight, or about how he's exploiting children for labor, or about how he's psychologically manipulating kids to feel anxiety and FOMO so that he can sell them more Robux. If he were capable of empathy for the victims of his platform he wouldn't have designed his platform to create victims in the first place. He doesn't give a shit about the safety of children, he only cares about himself and how much money he's making.

reply
tjungblut
3 hours ago
[-]
I'll probably get DV to oblivion for this, but I have to constantly wonder where those parents come from that need to forbid their children to roam freely on the internet.

Didn't they grow up in an age unrestricted web either? By now we must have two generations of unhinged children grown up with unsafe World of Warcraft, MSN, Whatsapp and ICQ. Oh and the p0rn... I mean, seriously, do you guys have nothing else to do than to moderate your kids Minecraft servers?

reply
iteria
3 hours ago
[-]
Here's the thing, my parents did forbid me: by denying me access. Kids have way, way more access to the internet than I ever did. When I was a kid, the only computer was in a communal area ans needed explicit permission by virtue of mandating that no one be using the phone. And then when I was older and we had broadband, it was still banned by virtue that my parents didn't think it was great for me to spend all my time on the computer.

My kid on the other hand, has orders of magnitude more exposure to the internet than I did. And it's far more private. Any chat I had with anyone was viewable by my parents by simply walking into the room. My kid has a private device she has 24/7 access too. The calculus is so much different and I say this as someone who is fairly lax in home much screen time my kid has and what she is allowed to view.

reply
akho
2 hours ago
[-]
Your kid has that private device because you gave it to them.
reply
Nextgrid
1 hour ago
[-]
Both things can be true; there can be both a moral panic about the exaggerated harms of unrestricted internet access, but also as the internet became commonplace and law enforcement not keeping up, it's plausible and likely there are many more predators on it now than it was back in our days.

Not to mention that getting onto the internet back in our day required a relative level of technical proficiency which could've filtered out vulnerable children, where as today there is no barrier. The corporate push to share personal data everywhere (often nowadays it's hard/impossible to operate pseudonymously - which doesn't seem to stop bad guys in any way but puts legitimate users at risk) doesn't help; in my days the number 1 rule was to never share PII on the internet, which nowadays doesn't exist and is difficult to implement in practice even if you tried.

reply
recursive
3 hours ago
[-]
The internet used to be that forest on the edge of town. Once in a while you might find some drug paraphernalia there. Now it's the Las Vegas strip with billboards for hookers and blow.
reply
Spivak
2 hours ago
[-]
I think your comparison is more apt than you think but not for the reason you say it is. The Internet of today is like the Las Vegas of today—a largely sterile corporate theme park whose only real goal is just separating you from your money and is ruthlessly efficient at it.
reply
recursive
1 hour ago
[-]
That was an intentional part of the analogy, as far as I know. It's big money.
reply
zanellato19
2 hours ago
[-]
I find it weird that you are not DV since the stuff you list here has caused a lot of issues for a lot of people _and_ things have gotten much much worse. The internet is so much more prevalent than it was 15 years ago. The danger is much higher.

The idea of having nothing to do is absurd, child safety is and should be a parent primary concern. Roblox is basically gambling, it puts kids as targets for predators and makes them addicted to several things.

Reading a comment on a news story like this is very very frustrating.

reply
Delphiza
1 hour ago
[-]
The 'unrestricted web' from your youth did not have you uploading 8k video of you performing sexual acts that both landed up on pedo sites and was used for blackmail (the threat sending to the whole school). Children are getting roped, not into gramps' porno collection, but sophisticated networks that financially exploit naivety of children in a shocking manner that simply did not exist 10+ years ago. My daughter tried to commit suicide as a result of getting caught up in pedo rings that trawled Roblox. For visibility, I'll spare you the downvote, but you are wrong... things are very different from 'back in the day'
reply
ecshafer
51 minutes ago
[-]
I grew up on the unrestricted internet, it doesn't mean I believe it was entirely good. I did (and DO!) many things that I realize are not beneficial, and do not want my children doing.
reply
darkwizard42
3 hours ago
[-]
Because the internet is far more optimized at capturing your attention and encouraging terrible behavior (purchases, viruses, scams, etc.)

When you were younger the scariest thing was joining an AOL chat room on a 56k modem. Now you can mind rot yourself on YouTube shorts with the next video loading in milliseconds while being fed content full of sports gambling ads.

To act like the internet doesn’t have significantly sharper edges and dangerous loops which affect children is ignoring the reality around you. The downvotes are not because in principle folks disagree, it’s that the situation is different.

reply
soperj
2 hours ago
[-]
i don't think the situation was that different. You could mind rot yourself on shfifty-five and all sorts of terrible content. People are just making an educated decision that that's not what they want for their kids. Parenting, how bout it.
reply
fatbird
2 hours ago
[-]
My wife was a teacher and sexual health educator for most of her career (grades 8-12).

When I was getting sex ed, part of the teacher's responsibility was grounding us in basic facts to dispel word-of-mouth myths that were patently absurd to anyone with any experience (like "sneezing after sex prevents pregnancy").

My wife's tasks was to explain that the hardcore porn they'd all seen was unrealistic in the same way that action movies completely misrepresent fights and stunts, and the real world doesn't work that way. Her problem was that she was arguing with video evidence that it could. The kids aren't unhinged, but they're definitely misled in a completely different way than we were.

reply
api
2 hours ago
[-]
Attention maximization algorithms and dark patterns took over between then and now. It’s not the same place.
reply
ciarlill
2 hours ago
[-]
I didn't grow up with Roblox.

I did grow up gambling pogs and MTG cards. I did grow up getting verbally sexually harassed at a Chuck-e-cheese. I did grow up finding my uncle's porno mag collection.

I also did grow up playing Ultima Online with a group of people who knew I was a kid and helped and guided me through some really hard times with compassion.

It's easy to focus on the amplification these platforms have on all the negative parts of our society. And it's a valid criticism . But it also should equally amplify the positive outcomes that occur from finding a community when you live in a bad situation or one with limited positive outcomes.

As usual education is key here and unfortunately our education system (and parents) will never be able to keep up with the pace of advancement. There is no room for nuance or gray areas in our society, everything is too polarized and personal responsibility is non existent.

reply
y-c-o-m-b
1 hour ago
[-]
Education will not be enough. They actually teach about this stuff in school and give plenty of warnings believe it or not.

I also gave lectures and installed FamilyLink and put restrictions on my router to prevent my child from accessing devices in a way I didn't approve of or when I couldn't adequately supervise it. The sneaky little shit still found ways to circumvent all this both here at home and at school. My child completely ignored all the warnings and eventually got roped into talking to a very sick predatory individual over Roblox.

The Roblox creep convinced my child to sign up for Instagram where they were able to get on video calls often. They then made my child watch them do very disturbing things, including attempting to hang themselves, cutting themselves open, and other very sick shit that I would have never imagined. They then threatened my child that if it was reported, they would kill our entire family. This went on for a couple of years apparently and we're still dealing with the trauma and fallout of it years later. Authorities were unable to determine the identity of the individual due to the many layers of obfuscation (fake names, VPN usage, etc).

I'm a software engineer of nearly 20 years and very knowledgeable of tech. The fact that this still happened despite my many roadblocks and safe-guards I put in place really shocked me to the core. Not to mention the whole "am I terrible parent" question which naturally arises out of all this. I've been reassured that I did everything I could reasonably do to prevent it, but that question always weighs on my mind regardless.

I warn every parent I can to keep their kids off Roblox and other "community driven" games that are like this.

reply
foobarian
1 hour ago
[-]
Out of curiosity how did they manage to sign up for Instagram? Browser? Asking for a friend
reply
y-c-o-m-b
45 minutes ago
[-]
Ah great question, I wondered this myself as there was no phone involved here (in our household) and Instagram has been banned on my network for many years. It was from a friend's phone at school and that same friend later provided my child with an old galaxy tab to bring home, which was cleverly hidden under the carpet beneath the bed with wifi access to our neighbor's internet (provided by neighbor's kid as well). It's amazing the lengths they'll go through to circumvent rules.

EDIT: and if you're wondering where the initial exposure to Roblox came from, it was from an Android tablet I had at the time which was setup strictly for kids games (hence the FamilyLink with time limits and stuff)

reply
foobarian
5 minutes ago
[-]
Wow. Honestly if it weren't for the bad stuff I would be secretly proud of a kid like that.
reply
ghusto
1 hour ago
[-]
> The fact that this still happened despite my many roadblocks and safe-guards I put in place really shocked me to the core. Not to mention the whole "am I terrible parent" question which naturally arises out of all this

I don't want to kick you when you're down, but you tried a technical solution on a human problem.

reply
thombles
29 minutes ago
[-]
Given what this person has gone through, if you want to be critical then I think you owe us a more detailed explanation what exactly would have worked better. Armchair parenting is very easy.
reply
y-c-o-m-b
31 minutes ago
[-]
I don't think that's necessarily accurate. Can you elaborate on what a "human" solution would be in your mind? For us, it was a combination of technical, educational, and traditional parenting as well as some therapy for other behavioral issues exhibited in school. We had after-school classes and sports. We played board games as a family. From our perspective, we were doing things correctly in both the technical and human aspect of it to make sure it never got to that point, yet it still happened.
reply
andrew_gs
1 hour ago
[-]
I have 10 year old twin boys, they play roblox with their friends from school, and they have a lot of fun. Importantly though they don't use the in-game chat, they fire up a group voice call on messenger kids and chat to each other through that while playing their games.

They play in the lounge and I can keep a bit of an eye on what they're doing.

Most of roblox is a trash fire, but there a couple of games that seem pretty fun when used as an activity for the kids to get together and chat and play.

reply
bstsb
3 hours ago
[-]
disclaimer: slightly biased as i've made USD from Roblox

it's really interesting to me seeing the debate around age verification from both sides. many Roblox developers and users seems to think that it's the end of the platform:

> Awesome! We love mandatory identity checks and age verification on every major social platform. Nobody needs privacy online. Thank you Roblox.

> No just no. This won’t work, this is too enforcing on the users and greatly invades our privacy

and then on the other side we have people saying it's a token gesture that doesn't go far enough:

> It could have adopted age verification before a wave of state legislation signaled that it would soon become mandatory anyway

my personal view on the matter is that, while age verification certainly reduces privacy, it was basically the only option left for Roblox to pursue - it's a move that absolutely will reduce child abuse on their platforms, and make it safer for kids to play online.

they also have one of the best privacy policies for age verification around.

(for context, they delete facial geometry immediately and store IDs for 30 days maximum. one alternative, Persona, used to hold IDs for up to six years, and currently have no set time limit on how long they keep other personal information)

reply
watwut
1 hour ago
[-]
> t's a move that absolutely will reduce child abuse on their platforms, and make it safer for kids to play online.

Playing an online game under your own name exposes you to entirely new and massively more acute level of risk practically immediately. Absolutely no way I would allow my kids to give their real names to a game.

reply
bstsb
1 hour ago
[-]
the signup page states in the Username box "Don't use your real name", and the facial verification doesn't need any personal details
reply
dimal
2 hours ago
[-]
We have a culture where we’ve been told for decades that market forces and the profit motive are sufficient for running a society. That the market will find a way to give everyone what they need efficiently without problems.

We’ve dispensed with ethics as a basis for human interaction, and the results are exactly what one would expect: a dystopia.

And the people making the most money off this system insist that it’s all for the best and that we should double down on this strategy. Any mention of putting limits on greed and exploitation is met with responses like, “what are you, a socialist?” as if the only two choices for structuring a society are either a rapacious hyper-exploitative capitalism and an oppressive Soviet state, and there’s no other option.

Capitalism needs constraints. Capitalism in the service of society can be a great thing. Capitalism without constraints is a cancer that will destroy everything in the pursuit of profit.

reply
stronglikedan
2 hours ago
[-]
> Capitalism needs constraints.

I'd just be happy with one constraint and that is to forbid the crony capitalism that is rampant today.

reply
swed420
2 hours ago
[-]
> I'd just be happy with one constraint and that is to forbid the crony capitalism that is rampant today.

But "regulated" capitalism inevitably leads to crony capitalism.

What we've arrived at can barely even be called capitalism, and old school capitalism paved the way:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220331174542/https://nymag.com...

reply
watwut
1 hour ago
[-]
The crony capitalism was brought to you literally by companies and millionaires scared of regulation and heavily pushing for deregulation. They supported Trump and republicans by large margin, especially financially.
reply
swed420
45 minutes ago
[-]
If you think only one of the two parties of capital are to blame for this timeline, I have a bridge to sell you.

Democrats manufactured consent for Trump's rise in a 1000 ways over decades. Neoliberalism delivered us Trump, who is merely a symptom of this broken system.

Dems/Repubs play good cop/bad cop; always in service to capital interests. We have a uniparty, but people are fooled by reasonable election turnout and close elections. Democracy is an illusion in the US.

reply
parasubvert
2 hours ago
[-]
> We have a culture where we’ve been told for decades that market forces and the profit motive are sufficient for running a society. That the market will find a way to give everyone what they need efficiently without problems.

I don't really think that culture has existed lately, it kind of died out with the 2008 financial crisis. Now it's about naked use of power, whether political or economic.

The problem with constraints on individual freedom (which is essentially what happens when you constrain capitalism) is that no one agrees on what they should be, and therefore a segment of society will not be happy with them, and claim them as tyrannical oppression. Sometimes this is hysterical nonsense, sometimes it has a point.

Ultimately the antidote to unfettered capitalism is sensible policy crafted through political compromise. But largely Western politics itself has skewed towards extremes lately, few have the patience or understanding for this process, they want a quick fix.

reply
soperj
2 hours ago
[-]
I don't think any actual socialist would ever argue for an oppressive Soviet state either. They'd want stuff like public firefighters, health care, sewage, roads, etc.

What is capitalism in service of society?

reply
parasubvert
2 hours ago
[-]
Social sector (non profits) have an important place in capitalist society as there are plenty of non-market / non-profit missions that are important.

Unfortunately nuance is kind of lost in today's politics.

reply
lossolo
2 hours ago
[-]
It's hyper individualism that is fueling this type of capitalism, the notion that you owe nothing to anyone and other people in society are not your concern, society itself is not your concern, it’s only about what you want etc. It's like a pond, if you follow hyper individualism, you will extract as many fish from the pond as you can, without caring what happens next or others using the pond, and the fish will not be able to reproduce for future generations, others will not be able to get as many fish as they need etc. It needs to be balanced. As you say, there is something in between that can work, we do not need to choose only between extremes.
reply
api
2 hours ago
[-]
If humans were much more rational this would work better.

The human brain is loaded with exploits, and capitalism being an excellent optimizer quickly finds and uses these exploits. Because they work, and more importantly they are way way easier than creating actual value.

A casino is more profitable than a hospital. Quack medicine sold with sensationalism is more profitable than real medicine. Porn is more profitable than good film or literature. Rage inducing click bait is more profitable than actual news or thoughtful editorial. It’s kind of just thermodynamics. These things require less energy input, and they don’t have to “work” because they exploit security vulnerabilities in the dopamine system instead.

We are hacking each other to death.

reply
Animats
46 minutes ago
[-]
> Since 2018, at least two dozen people in the United States have been arrested and accused of abducting or abusing victims they met on Roblox, according to a 2024 investigation by Bloomberg.

So about three per year, out of 112 million users? That's a far better track record than the Boy Scouts of America or the Roman Catholic Church.

Roblox has a strange demographic problem. Their average user age is around 14. They keep trying to push that up, at least to high school age where there's more spending power. Or so said one of their annual reports. But they just can't retain the early teens into the high school years.

This is the same problem as Chat Control. You let people talk, sometimes they're going to talk about things they're Not Supposed To Talk About. The amount of censorship needed to prevent this goes way beyond Orwell ever dreamed of. Roblox claims a goal of cutting off wrongspeak within 100ms. They're trying pretty hard. That's a concern - an AI listening to everything you say and evaluating it for political correctness.

Kids have been able to access Pornhub, etc. for more than a decade, and not much seems to have happened. Teen sex is down, not up. The graphics in Roblox are so bad that sex there is silly, not obscene, anyway.

This belongs to a long series of non-problems, along with the Hayes Code, the 1950s Congressional hearings on comic books, the Meese Report, and such. Amusingly, we aren't hearing much from the religious right any more; they aligned with MAGA, and now they're stuck defending Trump's sex life.

If anything, the Roblox problem is a subset of the too much screen time problem.

reply
ch2026
34 minutes ago
[-]
> So about three per year, out of 112 million users? That's a far better track record than the Boy Scouts of America or the Roman Catholic Church.

Yep. I’ve not witnessed something so wildly over exaggerated since D&D was responsible for widespread satanic cults in the 80’s.

reply
crazydoggers
1 minute ago
[-]
You’re comparing a hysteria over D&D where no one was actually harmed to actual child sexual abuse being allowed on an online platform?

One of the comments above has a video of a guy arrested and admitting to contacting several kids a day for a year.. that doesn’t sound like just some sort of over exaggerated panic.

reply
crazydoggers
3 hours ago
[-]
We need to pass laws that can make these executives serve jail time.

You’d quickly see these “impossible to moderate” platforms quickly clean up.

reply
parasubvert
2 hours ago
[-]
What law is being broken?
reply
crazydoggers
2 hours ago
[-]
I literally said we need to pass laws to make it illegal. (ie knowingly allowing child trafficking or exploitation on your service)
reply
zzzeek
3 hours ago
[-]
Agree, in any other field if a product cannot be made safe for consumers, you just don't produce and sell it. The world does not need to have a Roblox app (my 11 year old would disagree very much)
reply
andsoitis
3 hours ago
[-]
> Agree, in any other field if a product cannot be made safe for consumers, you just don't produce and sell it

This is patently untrue. We are exposed to risk, incl. death, from products and services every day. Nothing can be 100% safe, nor would it be wise to aim for it. The benefits, as they say, often outweigh the cost.

reply
GuinansEyebrows
3 hours ago
[-]
the benefits of roblox?
reply
andsoitis
3 hours ago
[-]
> the benefits of roblox?

Roblox has tens of millions of daily active users. I'm guessing they would say it is a great way to entertain themselves and to spend time with others, amongst others.

reply
iamnothere
3 hours ago
[-]
> in any other field if a product cannot be made safe for consumers, you just don't produce and sell it

I’ll keep this in mind the next time I pick up some acetylene or muriatic acid.

reply
zzzeek
2 hours ago
[-]
Acetylene is being marketed to children as something fun to play with ?
reply
iamnothere
2 hours ago
[-]
They literally said dangerous products couldn’t be sold to consumers in general. Obvious nonsense or chainsaws would require a license. I am pushing back against the safetyist notion that unsafe products cannot or should not be sold to the public.
reply
tyleo
3 hours ago
[-]
I don't understand why this is getting downvoted. As another response mentioned, we wouldn't tolerate this in any other industry.

If a restaurant served food that harmed people we wouldn't say, "it's on the parents." I don't get why so many folks are willing to say that with harms caused by tech companies.

Scale is no excuse either, "at our scale we just can't handle all the content." If anything it makes the problem more pressing to address.

reply
masfuerte
3 hours ago
[-]
> If a restaurant served food that harmed people we wouldn't say, "it's on the parents."

But we do! Acute harm is bad but chronic harm is, apparently, fine.

reply
Analemma_
3 hours ago
[-]
Yes, it's absurd how tech considers "but we're too big" to be a legitimate reason for inaction. That would get handcuffs clapped on you in any other industry. What happened to "too big to fail" being a sign of deep corruption requiring immediate action and breaking up companies?
reply
dylan604
3 hours ago
[-]
Really? How many handcuffs were clapped in the Too Big To Fail 2008 financial crisis? Why we think other large corporations with infinite funds would ever face consequences? This forum is funny in how when discussing the failures of tech seem to think it it is isolated from the rest of the corporate world, yet when discussing non-tech corporations are constantly lamenting that the corporate veil of protection is impenetrable.
reply
crazydoggers
1 hour ago
[-]
I've come to the belief that there is a larger than we assume portion of the population that is either complicit in these things, or doesn't think that these types of behaviors are "that bad". (some of the comments here are, sadly, exactly that) It's the only reasonable explanation I can think of why these things are so hard to root out. Some of these people perhaps never had children, which might be part of the disconnect. But if I was the CEO of a company harming children in this way, I'd make it my life mission to stamp it out and find and prosecute the individuals involved.

What else must we think goes through these executives minds? It's got to be things like "It's not my kids, so I don't care?" or "It's not that bad, people are too sensitive", or "I don't care what happens to kids because I have anti-personality disorder (psychopath) and only care about making money"

reply
fragmede
3 hours ago
[-]
> If a restaurant served food that harmed people we wouldn't say, "it's on the parents."

Isn't that how moralizing about the health benefits of a McDonalds-based diet go?

reply
slightwinder
2 hours ago
[-]
> If a restaurant served food that harmed people we wouldn't say

Is sugar in your country restricted? Or meat? I guess alcohol is, as it's everywhere. But restaurants server many harmful food which is only tolerated because harm comes from time and serving-sizes. But the same can be said for dark patterns in software, they are usually not obvious and in your face, but sneaky enough to fly under the parent's attentions.

reply
crazydoggers
1 hour ago
[-]
Are you honestly comparing sugar or meat to child trafficking and abuse? Thats some serious black-and-white fallacy thinking there.
reply
superkuh
3 hours ago
[-]
Or the parents. I wasn't aware the corporations were responsible for the raising of children.

That said, I'm with you on reducing the abstraction of liability that is the purpose of corporations. I just don't think parents not parenting is the reason to do it. I also don't really think parents should be thrown in prison and families destroyed. The use of violent force in this situation, against the CEOs or the parents, is entirely uncalled for and does more real damage than the "problem".

reply
hrimfaxi
3 hours ago
[-]
Our parents had problems figuring out how to program the time on the VCR. Technology advances faster than parents can keep up.

If someone was selling drugs on the street on the way to school, would we be blaming parents who let their kids walk to school that they should parent better, or would we deal with the drug dealer?

reply
zeroCalories
3 hours ago
[-]
Oh yeah, I remember 20 years ago when the Internet was fine for a child to brows unsupervised.
reply
fragmede
3 hours ago
[-]
If we think a drug dealer on the way to school is a good analogy, I have to ask; many someones went into a school with guns and shot children. How did we deal with that?
reply
dylan604
3 hours ago
[-]
> How did we deal with that?

We haven't. It keeps happening. Now what?

reply
jswelker
3 hours ago
[-]
I agree 100%, but it is fair to point out there is really no precedent for the level of involvement and knowledge and handholding it takes for a parent to navigate the digital world. Yes parents are widely failing, but it should be no surprise.
reply
quantified
3 hours ago
[-]
Parents understand that they cannot be the sole arbiter of everything for their children. Locking down your children's inputs is not fully realistic. If you remember being a child you remember circumventing your parents at every turn.
reply
Ajedi32
3 hours ago
[-]
And so instead we should expect corporations to fill that role?
reply
wslh
3 hours ago
[-]
I want to share a small story a close friend told me.

His son is eleven. Every Saturday he goes to tennis class. He's good at it, sure, but the important part is that he loves it.

One Saturday, though, he refused to go.

Why? Because there was a special Roblox event happening at the same time.

His father tried reasoning with him, the kid, agrees, a bit reluctantly.

But when the father walks into the bar, he sees a dozen kids all locked to their screens, playing the same Roblox event.

Roblox is an obvious form of manipulation, but honestly, we're not much better. Adults scroll under the influence of algorithmic dopamine loops. If the tobacco class action was once the benchmark for corporate harm, it may someday look tiny compared to what's coming (I hope).

reply
iamnothere
3 hours ago
[-]
How is this different from a LAN party? I spent countless hours engrossed in DOOM deathmatches and Starcraft games as a kid. I don’t really see the difference.

The problem outlined in the article is about moderation of spaces where kids are present. You seem to be trying to draw some broader conclusion that video games are harmful.

reply
waltbosz
3 hours ago
[-]
The problem is the Roblox games have exclusive timed events that give the children FOMO. So much that they have breakdowns and refuse to do their normally scheduled activities. And it changes their behavior.
reply
supportengineer
3 hours ago
[-]
That sounds like me when my parents made me go to bed instead of watching "The A-Team" or "Knight Rider".

Broadcast TV (UHF/VHF) was exclusive timed events which gave everyone FOMO, at least until the VCR became commonplace and affordable.

That gave you the ability to time-shift, as long as you could figure out how to set your VCR clock.

reply
iamnothere
2 hours ago
[-]
Any social games have this. I wasn’t an Everquest or WoW player, but I knew some, and scheduled raids with friends were a common thing. Minecraft servers hold events, etc.
reply
opinion3k
2 hours ago
[-]
You probably bought or pirated the games you played at the LAN party, maybe once and some DLC. You probably played with at least a few people you knew and the games had a goal - capture the flag or the bases or something - that often you had to work with a team to accomplish.

Roblox is designed from the ground up to sell Robux. Not to promote fun games or anything interesting in the least.

The games are complete brainrot - trying to find servers to get money measured in the billions to spend on rare items to collect to increase the money you earn per second to get more things, etc. And of course if you spend Robux - you can pointlessly accumlate fake billions even faster!

So the games are completely pointless and are nothing like playing Counterstrike or Doom or starcraft at a LAN party.

The events have also caused massive arguments and begging and pleading at my house since Roblox is rarely allowed (and would never be allowed if I had my way...)

reply
iamnothere
2 hours ago
[-]
> The games are complete brainrot - trying to find servers to get money measured in the billions to spend on rare items to collect to increase the money you earn per second to get more things, etc. And of course if you spend Robux - you can pointlessly accumlate fake billions even faster!

There’s at least two whole genre of games like this: idle games, and the more aggressive gacha games (which more often let you pay to win). I guess the differentiator with Roblox is the social aspect.

I do think pay to win is a problem, FWIW.

> So the games are completely pointless and are nothing like playing Counterstrike or Doom or starcraft at a LAN party.

Those games are pointless too though? As are nearly all games.

There’s legitimate criticisms of Roblox moderation and the business model. But games are games, and I feel like criticism of some Roblox-specific issues are getting entangled with normal gaming behavior. I get that you may not love to see kids who ignore you when they’re engrossed in a game, but that’s just how games are. Limit game time if it’s a problem, and/or make them earn their own money for pay-to-win junk. You’re the parent.

reply
parasubvert
2 hours ago
[-]
If you think DOOM and CS aren't brain rot, you might be just falling into nostalgia. Shooting demons and other players and spraying bloody gibs is absolute brain rot.

I play Roblox with my 9 year old, and no, they're not anymore brain rot than DOOM or Quake deathmatches were. Capture the flag or tower defense was almost never the point. It was being first in a deathmatch.

Quite frankly today's Roblox games tend to be a lot more enlightening, innovative and entertaining. Not all of course but many.

reply
watwut
1 hour ago
[-]
These arguments are nuts. The kids I know play roblox games ... honestly because they like the games. That is really really it. I am very confident they are not earning rare robux on it, because I know what they play.

> So the games are completely pointless and are nothing like playing Counterstrike or Doom or starcraft at a LAN party.

Frankly, Doom was pointless for christ sake, as pointless as it gets. And yes, obviously a game appealing to 8-12 years old is pointless to a teenager or adult. No, kids wont play the grandpa games. And yes, they do not want to play only games adults deemed educational or training whatever you think counter strike trains enough. They play them literally because they find those games fun.

reply
herbst
3 hours ago
[-]
Color me naive but we're there micropayments, sex and actual gambling in DOOM?
reply
iamnothere
3 hours ago
[-]
OP didn’t mention those, the focus was on a room of kids “locked” to their screens as if that was the primary issue. That’s what I was responding to.
reply
gomox
1 hour ago
[-]
I think porn came slightly later, in Duke Nukem 3D
reply
wslh
3 hours ago
[-]
> You seem to be trying to draw some broader conclusion that video games are harmful.

I never said video games are harmful. I talked about manipulation of people of all ages at a planetary scale.

reply
iamnothere
3 hours ago
[-]
Ok, thanks for clarifying. Still, I don’t see too much in modern gaming that’s different from what we had as kids. The gacha/gambling mechanics are overused and this might be detrimental. But I definitely spent days glued to the screen back in the day even without that stuff.

(The moderation problems in the article are clearly a new and separate issue that needs to be dealt with.)

reply
smelendez
3 hours ago
[-]
Adults definitely do this too.

I bet adult tennis instructors get a lot of cancellations on Super Bowl Sunday. In certain circles, you're going to have a hard time scheduling a screen-free dinner party on Oscar night, or opposite the finale of a hit TV show.

reply
wslh
3 hours ago
[-]
Isn't it obvious that you mention discrete events when, now, depending on the number of apps and online presence there is a virtually continuous set of events?
reply
Froztnova
55 minutes ago
[-]
This feels like an incredibly normal thing though? Kids oftentimes want to do things that are highly stimulating and "fun" in substitute for things that are more rewarding, often to the point of obstinance.

And I don't want to defend Roblox, their laissez faire attitude towards predators abusing their platform is abhorrent and disgusting. But this anecdote is about as old as civilization.

reply
nsilvestri
3 hours ago
[-]
How dare this child be excited for a special event in his game!
reply
ChrisArchitect
2 hours ago
[-]
Related:

Roblox CEO interview about child safety didn't go well

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46013477

reply
vegadw
3 hours ago
[-]
There's a natural tension between freedom and protection here. Anyone on HN is aware of all the debate for and against section 230. We're also probably the crowd most vocally against ID verification laws for adult sites or just age verification for non-adult content, like YouTube or Discord.

I, personally, am in the "Parents gotta parent" camp, but know that doesn't cover all the problems, plus only addresses children when there's also real harm to adults too.

This turns into a big mess of a discussion involving data privacy laws too, and before you know it you have people talking about how the US needs a GDPR equivalent and someone else complaining about cookie banners, loosing the thread entirely as it turns into this big swirling mess of a problem with some people worried about kids, some worried about privacy, some worried about actual personal impacts/addiction, etc.

I feel like a lot of it quickly becomes disconnected from reality. Let's pick on the adult site age verification laws. I live in Nebraska, which means if I go to HornPub, it tell me "Govenment said no"

Now, I'm not going to pretend they're some beacons of moral authority, but I at least think for their own business interest they'll keep CSAM and revenge content off their platform. But what happens when a 16 year old that absolutely will find a place to watch adult content anyway goes looking? Would we rather them wind up on a platform that's moderately safe, or somewhere that serves the worst of the worst?

That, I think, is the problem: Any rules, laws that say "Let's restrict what websites can serve users" mean either a total country-wide mass surveillance system tied into every ISP filtering every domain and blackholing any request to all but approved DNS servers and aggressively blocking VPNs, or it's a law only hurting the companies at least trying to comply with the laws that do matter.

This article has undertones of asking for better parental controls, but kids will always bypass them unless they're aggressive enough that adults are uncomfortable with them too.

I have seen adults in my life fall victim to addiction to social media (Facebook, tiktok) , online shopping (Temu, Amazon), and I can't help but think the solution is pretty obvious:

Don't kill the product, regulate it's abuse. Facebook? Make algorithmic feeds / infinite scrolling illegal (At least as the default), not social media. Temu? Make gamling-esque UI illegal. Make new data protection laws. Hold executives that violate these laws criminally liable. Fine the companies more than the cost of doing business.

Roblox, Minecraft, and other games with user-created mini-games/servers/etc and random encounters with strangers online? Competitive games with kernel level anti-cheat? We all bitch about them, but the answer has always been obvious: Don't hang out with random strangers. The services should provide a friends-only mode, and that should be the default. Ta-da, problem solved, by social means, not technical means.

reply
conception
3 hours ago
[-]
A colleague of mine had the idea that an easy solution for a lot of social media content issues would be any content given by an algorithm is exempt from safe harbor laws. You pick what users see? You’re responsible and liable.
reply
iamnothere
3 hours ago
[-]
> The services should provide a friends-only mode, and that should be the default.

This isn’t such a bad idea, although maybe it should depend on the type of game. As a kid the only place I played games with random people was Quake servers and Battle.net. This wasn’t really an issue, as there’s not much time to socialize when you’re blowing up your opponent. But Roblox seems to be primarily a social meta-game with many sub-games, so it’s riskier.

It’s a spectrum. On one end you have Second Life and VRChat, which should absolutely have a no kids policy. At the other end you have single player games which are obviously fine. In the middle there’s everything from online Mario Kart games to Counter Strike. Some are probably more ok than others. As it stands Roblox is uncomfortably close to the no-no zone.

reply
vegadw
2 hours ago
[-]
That makes a lot of sense to me: You only get chat with people you know. You can still even have mixed people-you-know and stranger lobbies, but you have to explicitly make them "someone you know" to do it.

That would likely mean everyone just sends chat requests at the start of each game though, which is more annoying, like a cookie popup.

reply
api
3 hours ago
[-]
I’ve come to see this as a general rule: trash maximizes engagement.

By trash I basically mean either porn or gambling. By porn I don’t just mean the sexual kind but also political rage porn, etc. By gambling I mean anything that exploits the kinds of dopamine hooks that a slot machine exploits. There are many variations of these things but those are the basic forms.

Those are the kinds of things you get if you optimize for engagement.

You also get more predators and trolls because those are the kinds of people who create the most engaging content.

This isn’t new. It’s been known since mass media was invented. “If it bleeds it leads,” the P.T. Barnum principle of “any publicity is good publicity,” and so on.

What I think is new is the degree of individualized hyper optimization two way digital platforms allow. They let us turn this so far up that apps on a little pocket computer can start rivaling cigarettes for addictive qualities and psychological harm.

reply