@LuoSays: This morning, I read an article by @paulbloomatyale titled "Kids These Days" and found it really interesting. The mains…

This morning, I read an article by @paulbloomatyale titled "Kids These Days" and found it really interesting. The mainstream voices these days keep saying that smartphones are ruining a generation. Because kids are spending more time on their phones, less time on outdoor activities, and there's more anxiety and depression. But after reviewing the research, Paul Bloom finds that things aren't that simple: the causal link between smartphones and teen mental health is far less certain than the public imagines. There's a really interesting thought experiment in the article. Imagine there's something: As soon as a kid touches it, they get hooked and sit with it for hours; It crowds out time for exercise, sleep, and hanging out with family and friends; Long-term use can even change the brain. This sounds like something addictive—shouldn't we restrict it? But that thing could also be—a book. If a kid lies in bed reading novels for 5 hours a day, we might say they "love reading"; But if a kid lies in bed scrolling on their phone for 5 hours a day, we'd say they've "gotten addicted." This is also what I find most intriguing about the article: A lot of the debates about "whether tech is ruining the next generation" are ostensibly about science and causation, but underneath, they're really about values. What we truly mind has never just been how much time kids spend—it's what we think is worth them spending time on. This makes me think of the current debates about AI. Is using AI to write lazy? Will using AI to code erode basic skills? If kids use AI too early, will they lose the ability to think independently? These questions certainly need data, of course. But data can never answer the last question: If AI really can do more and more things for us, then where exactly do we hope the next generation will spend their time and brainpower? That might be the truly hard question of the AI era.