81–90 of 132 posts
Clearly, the point is to look good to some prospective voters that likely won't get legally rejected because it applies to no one. You can claim to have done something without worrying about a messy reality.
> That may limit the new age restrictions to just Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.
It seems the purpose was to ban anything else other than TikTok.
I'm baffled by the general lack of absolute outrage around these recent bills requiring government issued ID to use the internet. Most of the comments here are discussing irrelevant nuances like "oh, well it seems to only apply to platforms above a certain size," while ignoring the atrocity that these bills represent for the freedoms and privacy that we've all taken for granted up until now. Get your bloody hands off…
Pointing at kids is incredibly effective tool, no wonder it's utilized so often. There is already growing momentum outside of flyover states and outside of social media, gaming platforms now are encouraged quite heavily to implement severe age verification systems, out of fear of being sued or having to deal with COPPA issues. Further, people will likely embrace any bills that encourage a standardized "encrypted" gov…
I suspect Generative AI will accelerate the transition to real ID
There’s a new impetus to be able to tell who is real from who is not online
Younger me would probably be angry and disappointed at how I have all but accepted that it’s going to happen one way or another
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s ludicrous that proof of ability to operate a motor vehicle is positioned as a prerequisite for using the Internet—- more so given the myriad of ways that a license can be suspended.
Where did you get that it has to be a driver's license? Just get a regular ID card if you don't need to be able to drive.
So, yes, you’re technically correct, but no, no one is bringing their kids to the DMV for photo ids and not driver’s licenses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it’s proven that is bad for them, I would not be so opposed. Same with alcohol or tobacco.
Driving is proven to be very dangerous but our government still encourages us to brave traffic every day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another reason why a simple ID which only purpose is being an ID might be useful. No more non-driver drivers licenses
A lot of people do get those currently, just ID cards for non-drivers, also issued through the DMV. Adults need them for various things like voting, food stamps, etc. But I've never heard of a child needing an ID card (aside from travelling abroad), although they could probably (?) get one if they needed - maybe they don't issue them to people under 18 cause there hasn't been any need
ISTR that like DLs, state IDs are a net revenue source, so bills that require more people to get them in practice are, in net effect, tax bills (and because they are closer to capitations than even a flat tax, are regressive tax bills.)
Nice, Another MOAT added to social media platforms. Big platforms like Facebook can spend a lot of money complying with the "law" whereas the startups disrupting it will die.
I'm baffled by the general lack of absolute outrage around these recent bills requiring government issued ID to use the internet. Most of the comments here are discussing irrelevant nuances like "oh, well it seems to only apply to platforms above a certain size," while ignoring the atrocity that these bills represent for the freedoms and privacy that we've all taken for granted up until now. Get your bloody hands off…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea that's BS. I didn't have any ID till I was 16 and got a driver's license. A lot of kids, like city kids, don't get one till years later. Are they planning to create a new type of ID for children? I wouldn't want my kids anywhere near social media either, but I wouldn't want to rely on the state to track and police their behaviour.
Another reason why a simple ID which only purpose is being an ID might be useful. No more non-driver drivers licenses
I'm baffled by the general lack of absolute outrage around these recent bills requiring government issued ID to use the internet. Most of the comments here are discussing irrelevant nuances like "oh, well it seems to only apply to platforms above a certain size," while ignoring the atrocity that these bills represent for the freedoms and privacy that we've all taken for granted up until now. Get your bloody hands off…
[flagged]