r/worldnews • u/PlusCardiologist1799 • 13h ago
The Supreme Court of India declares that children of all ages should have the fundamental right to access and use the internet
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/right-to-access-use-internet-a-fundamental-right-of-every-individual-including-children-supreme-court-555139110
u/69_queefs_per_sec 11h ago
Yeah but ban AI for kids, it’s terrible.
We don’t want a generation with atrophied thinking skills because AI did it all for them since they were 3.
39
u/Purple-Anxiety7816 11h ago
We've already got that.
9
u/10_Eyes_8_Truths 6h ago
Yeah I've got a bunch of casual workers at my job that are all university students that are using AI for their essays. I don't see anything good from this
4
-2
u/spiderweb91 6h ago
We should also ban computers and calculators. Everyone only gets to use an abacus from now on.
10
u/Queasy_Artist6891 3h ago
Calculators are not allowed in most Indian school exams. I remember having to do square roots, large multiplications and even logs using pen and paper in my high school during jee prep
21
u/eatmyscoobysnacks 6h ago
Computers and calculators are already banned for relevant school material. You don’t let kids use a calculator for a simple addition test.
5
u/Auctorxtas 3h ago
Calculators and even logarithmic tables are strictly prohibited in Indian entrance exams.
-11
u/gunner_3 4h ago
I don't think AI will hinder thinking skills for kids infact it will enhance them to think beyond what we are thinking.
6
u/SmokingApple 4h ago
There is already evidence that it is in fact hindering thinking skills and it's still very new
-2
u/gunner_3 3h ago
Yes it is hindering thinking now because our thinking patterns, education style everything is not yet optimized to the AI world. The world is moving in that direction and AI will be part of our daily life so things will change. Maybe today we don't need to expose kids to AI but in near future this would be necessary similar to electricity or computing.
-1
u/ants_are_everywhere 1h ago
There is not good evidence of this. You had the same thing happen when people thought word processors like Microsoft Word made you dumb in the 1980s, handheld calculators in the 1970s. People have argued that books make you dumb since antiquity.
-59
u/ezoe 11h ago
How do they suppose to learn coding then? Not using AI agent coding tool right now is technological suicide.
11
22
u/rohstroyer 9h ago
Learning to code the "old fashioned" way will be better for developing their critical thinking and actually understanding what's happening when they write code. You can't use a tool effectively if you don't know what you're doing in the first place.
-2
u/Great-Trifle2810 2h ago
This sounds a lot like saying that a worker in a textile factory should learn to weave by hand before using the machines.
5
u/rohstroyer 2h ago
You don't need to know how to weave to verify the output of a textile machine is correct. Conflating a subjective output with an objective output is certainly one of the takes of all time.
-1
u/Great-Trifle2810 1h ago
You don't need to know python to know if the output of a python program is correct, at least not in all cases.
I say this as someone that uses several tools I have vibe coded together to make my job easier every day with basically no understanding of how they work. I just know that when I send an input I get my desired output.
At the end of the day all that matters is that it works within the specified parameters.
•
u/rohstroyer 1h ago edited 1h ago
Holy mother of Dunning-Kruger lmao. Your first line itself proves my point when you say "not in all cases" and yet you kept going. You need to understand the idea that just because you can vibe code slop doesn't mean it's the best way, or even a good way, to programmatically solve a problem. Bigger software has bigger concerns for things like performance, architecture, and memory usage. I honestly can't believe you actually typed out that whole comment, mentioned that you don't know how your tools work, and still thought you're making a point about learning how to code. 🤡
•
u/Great-Trifle2810 33m ago
I'm saying some cases require much deeper knowledge, most don't.
As AI improves it will render knowing Python into the same sort of skill knowing assembly is now, not useless but incredibly niche and irrelevant to the vast majority of computer users.
My point is that "learning to code" is rapidly shifting away from "learning to write in a specific programming language"
Yes, larger software is more complex, it's almost like they are developing more and more tools to allow AI to have larger context windows and work better on large programs.
I'm also pretty confident that in 5 years AI will be better at writing efficient code then 95% of people employed to code were 5 years ago.
You try to come off very smug and superior for someone that missed the entire point I was making. 😂
•
u/rohstroyer 19m ago edited 16m ago
Learning to code has never been about learning a specific language and always about learning how to break down a problem and structure the solution's logic. But of course you'd know that if you knew anything about coding anything that wasn't a single purpose script. Even that is me being charitable because it's not like you actually did anything meaningful in producing those. It's incredible how you can feel confident making predictions on something you, by your own admission, don't even understand. Listening to you would be like taking advice on learning how to drive from someone that has only ever been a consumer of public transport. If there was a meaningful point in there relevant to the subject of learning how to code, you have entirely failed in expressing it.
•
u/Great-Trifle2810 5m ago
Learning to code has never been about learning a specific language and always about learning how to break down a problem and structure the solution's logic.
I don't disagree, but using AI doesn't make that impossible. If anything AI will do a great job helping understand and develop this logic and structure.
But of course you'd know that if you knew anything about coding anything that wasn't a single purpose script.
Oh look, more insults. Clever.
Even on the relatively small tools I have developed I have already learned that this is important. In fact I learned it because the AI struggled if I didn't do it.
It's incredible how you can feel confident making predictions on something you, by your own admission, don't even understand.
Time will tell, I feel confident because AI has continued to exceed my expectations at every turn and I see no indication that is stopping.
The rest of your comment is boring personal attacks. 🥱
14
4
u/UnknownGamer014 9h ago
Kids don't need that. They should first build proper thinking capabilities and problem solving skills, which will help them drive the AI much better down the line.
-12
u/weirdchickenss 11h ago
no one is learning coding at the age of 10. and there are so many better platforms guided and improve cognitive thinking/critical thinking with AI assistance.
i think what the oc meant is to ban AI where its clear brain rot, scams, unreal, distortion and explicits videos.
2
1
u/TheColourOfHeartache 9h ago
My parents started teaching me very young, and now I'm a professonal coder
25
u/UnknownGamer014 9h ago
Holy shit BASED. I love SCI regarding such issues. They have again and again prevented loss of privacy and government overreach, though did fail at times.
2
u/ajatshatru 3h ago
Lmao, news title making judgements with zero practical effect or implementation. Meanwhile my lords can't be bothered with finishing normal cases.
1
1
u/notsaneatall_ 4h ago
And they have watered down the SC/ST act SO MUCH. I think they do a lot of nice things, no one wants to appreciate them
4
u/dontknow_anything 4h ago
I for one completely oppose it. Children under 5 should not have access to internet.
Anyway Indian govt bans a lot of adult websites. This will only give more power, I guess.
•
u/EmbarrassedHelp 1h ago
I think the more important issue is that governments should not be allowed to require mandatory online age verification to "protect" the children. A court ruling like this does not restrict what parental controls a parent can use, but it does appear to weaken attempts at passing blanket bans enforced with age verification.
1
u/UnknownGamer014 3h ago
I wholeheartedly agree with you, but that's parents' responsibility, not the sate's.
0
u/chargoggagog 2h ago
Parents are clearly incapable of doing that, hence why regulation is needed. Your argument is no different than the “states rights” argument.
2
u/UnknownGamer014 2h ago
Make the parents aware and equip them with proper tools instead? This is clearly a response that affects a disproportionate number of people. And also, mostly ineffective. 80% of ineligible teens and younger in Australia are still using social media. This also creates a sense of false security in parents.
1
u/grchelp2018 1h ago
then hold the parents responsible. Do not let parents off the hook if parents cant parent.
5
u/MrPeepersVT 11h ago
No word on whether they have the right to me mercilessly harassed 5 times daily by phone to return their modem despite having returned it when they were 7 years old
2
u/Agitated-Love1727 8h ago
Great declaration by the SCI, and the rationale behind it is so sensible!
1
-1
u/kaisurniwurer 7h ago
For sure it's closely followed with a fundamental duty and responsibility for parents to ensure that that access is safe, right?
4
u/anor_wondo 4h ago
better than the alternative that is making the most incompetent websites on the internet demand an id verification from you. 'think of the children' is the most common phrase when a government wants to violate your privacy
1
u/Great-Trifle2810 2h ago
It is simply never going to be reality that parents are going to universally monitor their children's internet use and the government cannot realistically make every child whose parents don't do this a ward of the state.
There needs to be a systematic implementation of safety measures.
1
u/grchelp2018 1h ago
Get a few parents in trouble and the rest will do better.
•
u/Great-Trifle2810 42m ago
The idea that the parents that don't care about their kids using the Internet are going to immediately change that behavior because a few parents get a fine while millions face no consequences is laughable.
Like 30%-40% of parents still hit their kids in 2026, even in first world countries where it is strongly discouraged or illegal. And most kids that get hit still stay with those parents.
Child services simply do not have remotely close to the capacity to deal with this. We need technical systems.
0
0
-36
u/Purple-Anxiety7816 13h ago
They just don't want anyone out of their control, it's got nothing to do with the kiddies fundamental rights. We've been sold a lie, and like sheep we are all now controlled, spied on, watched, quantified as cogs in the wheel for Ai. Good luck human race.
23
u/Eternal_Alooboi 11h ago
Isnt that half their point? The govt has failed to protect its citizens from predatory data harvesting and spying. It has even participated in large scale spying of its citizens at times (that whole Pegasus(?) issue with journalists).
But this should not mean kids/people in general should be banned from internet access. As that would prove detrimental in more ways than one, towards their education, social life, etc. Its upto legislation, parental control, media and internet literacy folks to teach them the right way. Which as of yet doesnt exist outside the more progressive schools in urban India.
-15
u/Purple-Anxiety7816 11h ago
The govt aim is to control and exploit.
8
u/Agitated-Love1727 8h ago
You do realise that the Supreme Court is independent of the government and doesn't "control people's lives"? The Supreme Court's role is to interpret the laws passed by the parliament and ensure it doesn't conflict with our Constitution or infringe Fundamental Rights. How exactly is the Supreme Court "controlling people's lives" according to you?
0
u/Aarvy271 1h ago
This is tricky. Internet should not let the kids ascertain their sense of self worth.
-1
5h ago
[deleted]
1
u/A_UniqueAspect 4h ago
If they ruled that it's NOT a right you'd be saying it's because they're planning to add age verification. Genuinely what's going to please you all
-38
u/RankinFile2 8h ago
When in Mumbai as a tourist, I saw a diaperless toddler in the street, seemingly unaccompanied by an adult, shit himself. Fundamental rights for children in that country and they’re debating internet access?
27
u/Available-Dog-5549 8h ago
You'll see children being sold to elites for pleasure at American parties, the same party that current President of USA visited multiple times. But they're busy sending people on moon. Priorities
17
u/Lugnut8704 6h ago
When in America as a tourist, i saw a fairly rich high school kid get shot in the street, by another kid. Priorities wrong much ? 😕
4
u/Green-Contract-3554 2h ago
You should worry about your elites eating kids before worrying about ours.
-84
11h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
54
281
u/siddharthvader 12h ago