Despite building an increasingly screen-focused world, billionaire tech leaders are keeping their own children away from the tech they helped create.

As far back as 2010, Apple cofounder Steve Jobs told a New York Times reporter his kids had never used an iPad and that, “We limit how much technology our kids use at home.”

Since then, the trend of Silicon Valley billionaires keeping their families away from technology has become even more pronounced, thanks in part to the rise of social media and short-form video.

At the 2024 Aspen Ideas Festival, early Facebook investor and billionaire Peter Thiel joined Chen among the ranks of tech leaders who are setting strict limits on screens. Thiel said he only lets his two young children use screens for an hour-and-a-half per week, a revelation that prompted audible gasps from the audience.

Other tech CEOs, including Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Snap’s Evan Spiegel, and Tesla’s Elon Musk, have also spoken about limiting their children’s access to devices. Gates has said he did not give his children smartphones until age 14 and banned phones at the dinner table entirely. Snap CEO Evan Spiegel, in 2018, said he limits his child to the same 1.5 hours per week of screen time as Thiel. And finally, Musk, who bought the social media company X, formerly Twitter, in 2022, said it “might’ve been a mistake” to not set any rules on social media for his children.

Yet, as the trials against social media companies continue and country after country moves toward legislating what Silicon Valley’s billionaires have quietly practiced for years, the private behavior of the world’s most powerful tech figures stands in contrast to what they’re promoting and building

  • mrnobody@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    124
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Hmmm it appears they understand how evil all the tech companies are, harvesting data to the fullest extent. Spying, influencing, etc.

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Oh they absolutely know. Zuck’s Meta is on trial right now not only because Instagram creates an addiction for kids, but because it was made delibarately, on purpose. Kids addictron was the goal.

      They’ve always known. They just don’t care for the rest of humanity.

      • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Look to the masters, the tobacco industry with additives to make it more addictive (been a while since I researched it and that’s the one that popped up, but they spent 60+ years making it more addictive).

        Social media speedran it with something apparently innocuous (‘they trust me, stupid fucks’), and a bunch of corrupt psychologists (and marketers/advertisers also known as corrupt psychologists). Do no harm my ass, wait, that doesn’t apply to psychologists, wait again, that’s more like guidelines for doctors (not an actual vow in most places).

        Next bill of rights / constitution needs to address this specifically, there’s a reason why quacks have a special hatred (and if there were one, a special hell)…

      • thejml@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Not to excuse that POS, but more on how we got here: You have a product that only makes money when people actively use it. How do you increase your ROI? Make people want to use it and want to use it longer. Do that by making it more interesting, more relevant, more stimulating and appear bottomless so people can use it as long as possible.

        Addiction for EVERYONE is the only way FB continues to increase revenue. We just single out Children because they are most easily influenced and impacted.

        • matlag@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Oh I’m perfectly aware this is most likely a chain of pressure and responsibility dodging:

          • the top demands more users more active,
          • the bottom develops some solutions they demo while refusing any responsability for its impact.
          • Some middle pressed to meet demand while having only one solution available at the time eventually decide to deploy it, maybe “temporarily”.
    • architect@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I doubt. I think it’s more like they fear us getting to them through their kids.

      Imagine doing that to your child. Raising them in an alternate world that doesn’t really exist? That’s not fearing the tech and caring about their kids. That’s control. That’s them proving their children are the same things as a car.