this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
147 points (100.0% liked)

News

23409 readers
2710 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Australia has passed a groundbreaking ban on social media use for children under 16, the strictest of its kind globally.

Platforms like X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, and Reddit have one year to implement the age limit, with fines up to AU$50M for non-compliance.

Supporters cite mental health concerns, while critics argue the ban risks isolation for marginalized youth, lacks proper research, and excludes harmful platforms like 4chan.

Privacy concerns surround proposed age-verification methods. Opponents, including parents, scholars, and tech companies, argue the legislation is rushed and poorly designed, potentially exacerbating existing issues.

all 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 30 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (4 children)

An Australian Senate committee signed off on the legislation late Tuesday but said social media platforms should find “alternative methods for assuring age” rather than forcing users to submit personal information such as their passports or other digital identification.

Like? You think letting these same companies you see as a threat to kids to come up with their own verification method is a good plan? LOL

Edit - lost words somehow

[–] [email protected] 9 points 12 hours ago

Are you over 16? Click yes

[–] [email protected] 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

How do you assure age without personal identification? It’s funny that they signed on the bill but only know how they don’t want to force it, without any ideas or alternatives. I got no love for Meta but I’m really wondering what can you possibly implement?

Oh and also, VPN. GG.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Read it again.

What it actually says is that SM sites can collect personal ID, but must provide an alternative.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 14 hours ago

At least you have words available to lose. I lost all my words already.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

and excludes harmful platforms like 4chan.

Jesus Christ.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

4chan is not excluded.

The Communication minister can extend the requirement to any internet site at any time without parliamentary approval.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

No block in Roblox either.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 14 hours ago

All my friends kids are playing Roblox and i'm trying to get everyone updated about Roblox.

The only concern they had until now, was the kids spending money for cosmetics.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

So your complaint is the bill doesn’t go far enough? It should ban more things?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I'm, generally, skeptical of the efficacy of any such ban. But if a ban is going to be in place, 4chan et co seem like they should be pretty high fucking priorities to close off to kids. It's like declaring a ban on beer for health reasons, but clarifying that unregulated backwoods moonshine a step away from wood alcohol is still 100% kosher.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

So you admit this is a good start? 4chan isn’t particularly popular anymore, btw. I’m guessing that’s why it flew under the radar.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

But that's exactly the problem, right?

Social media platforms, forums and other online social spaces wax and wane on popularity. New ones are turning up all the time. This won't prevent kids from socializing online, it'll just force them to do it in the least safe places. Even if you try to regulate every online social space, it'll just turn into a game of whack a mole.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

So we should legalize stabbings because otherwise people will turn to “even worse” forms of violence? Surely there must be a simpler and less moronic approach to legislation.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

And how exactly are they going to enforce this? Kids always find a way around … always.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago
  1. Uploading ID to site.

  2. face scanning and continual monitoring, so if a person comes into view they must face scan. Under the law, its prohibited for children to watch prohibited sites even with their parents.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago

Honestly, who gives a shit. Literally no one should be using these brain-rotting democracy destroying websites anyway. If you want your privacy get a life.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago

Exactly this. When I was in school, we had these things called firewalls. And as a kid, I knew exactly how to get around said firewalls and access whatever online content I wanted. So what's going to stop the same thing from occurring on a national scale here? And with platforms like Fediverse and nostr, shit like this is completely unenforceable.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Not only do I have concerns about privacy concerns of age-verification, I think the "ban until 16, then unrestricted" is a very bad policy. Yes, social media is harmful to kids, but frankly, it's harmful to everyone. If kids have no exposure to social media and no education on how to use it appropriately, it's just going to concentrate the issues to teens/young adults.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

So… it’s harmful to everyone, especially kids, which is why we shouldn’t ban its use by kids?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

This was a Rupert Murdoch campaign against Social Media called "let them be kids".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I work with young men on a daily basis and all I can say is: holy shit finally. You guys don’t understand what it’s like out there. 16 year olds are dumb as shit by default, so imagine what happens when you add Joe Rogan and Andrew Tate. Please. Imagine what it’s like to explain for the hundredth time why human trafficking is actually bad, and feminism isn’t evil, and so on. I just can’t imagine ANY FUCKING REASON that a child needs to be on a social media website of any kind, from twitch to twitter.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

So now instead of getting their news from Facebook, they're getting it from Truth Social? Or some new fly by night social media platform even less reputable?

Surely that's a lot worse?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

First of all, fifteen year olds don’t give a shit about political “news.” Secondly, is your argument that Facebook shouldn’t be banned because something else just as bad as Facebook exists (which could also be banned)?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

All of their content is public though, you don't need to verify your age to watch a Joe Rogan podcast.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago

They get pushed way harder than they should on nearly every platform

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Governments is burning money on these bans. Parent should be able to make these choices for their families. Maybe if workers could count on public education and have enough money and time off they would be able to.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 hours ago

Nonsense. This law will generate revenue as we fine the ever-living-shit out of social media websites until they can figure out how to get kids off their toxic platforms.