[flagged]
Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
191–200 of 720 posts
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#192I might be the only one here in favor of this, and wanting to see a federal rollout. It is not reasonable to expect parents to spontaneously agree on a strategy for keeping kids off social media- and that kind of coordination is what it would take, because the kids + social media companies have more than enough time to coordinate workarounds. Have the law put the social media companies on the parents side, or these k…
I'm in favor of kids not using social media, but not of the government forcing this on people nor spinning up whatever absurd regulatory regime is required. And the chance of actually enforcing it is zero anyway. It's no more realistic to expect this to work than to expect all parents to do it as you say. It's just wasted money plus personal intrusion that won't achieve anything.
I'm in favor of kids not using porn, but not of the government forcing this on people nor spinning up whatever absurd regulatory regime is required. And the chance of actually enforcing it is zero anyway. It's no more realistic to expect this to work than to expect all parents to do it as you say. It's just wasted money plus personal intrusion that won't achieve anything.
I only changed 2 words for 1.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#193Florida House essentially breaking out the classic: “We’re from the government and we’re here to help.”
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
>effectively banned In my opinion, these governments haven't implemented 'effective' bans (though maybe chilling, as you say) but primarily created awkward new grey markets for the personal data that these policies rely on for theatrics. Remember when China 'banned' youth IDs from playing online games past 10PM? I think a bunch of grandparents became gamers around the same time... https://www.nature.com/articles/s415…
Which is exactly what happens for markets that are desirable enough. We compare bans of things not enough people care about, to bans of things that people are willing to do crazy things for. They don't yield the same results.
No policy is 100% effective. Kids still get into alcohol, but the policy is sound.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vaping isn't the same thing as smoking.
They are consuming nicotine, and tobacco companies are invested in / are the companies producing products in that space. It seems functionally to be the same.
Only if you ignore... a lot. Cancer rates, smoking sections in restaurants, the smell, the yellow grime and used butts sprinkled everywhere, the impact on asthmatics... Smoking a cigarette gets you a lot more than just the nicotine.
A smoker moving to vaping is an enormous benefit to health and society.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm in favor of kids not using social media, but not of the government forcing this on people nor spinning up whatever absurd regulatory regime is required. And the chance of actually enforcing it is zero anyway. It's no more realistic to expect this to work than to expect all parents to do it as you say. It's just wasted money plus personal intrusion that won't achieve anything.
It seems like you are in favor of something that requires coordination, but don't believe in coordination. Is there a different way you think this could be achieved?
[deleted]
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then there is a data breach, and every person in the country is de-anonymized. No thank you.
A data breach where? The central authority should be someplace that already has your non-anonymous ID data, so using your ID for age verification doesn't give them any new ID information. The only new thing that them doing age verification adds is that they might keep a list of verification tokens they have issued. Someone who obtained copies of the verification tokens you requested might go to various social media s…
> The central authority should be someplace that already has your non-anonymous ID data, so using your ID for age verification doesn't give them any new ID information. The only new thing that them doing age verification adds is that they might keep a list of verification tokens they have issued.
But the central authority, a third party, will get a heads-up every time someone - whether child or adult - logs into the social media site. That's a privacy violation. Even if the verification system were set up in such a way that the third party wouldn't be able to know which exact website I'm trying to visit, the third party would be able to track how frequently I visit websites that require age verification. With just this law, it would be "you visited social media during X, Y, and Z times." With extensions of this law to other kinds of websites, it would be "you visited social media or porn or violent video games or alcohol sites during X, Y, and Z times", which obfuscates the kind of website I visit but also makes the internet into something I have to whip out an ID for just to use.
> That's fixed by making it so the token that is given to the social media site is not the token that came from site that checked your ID. You give the social media site a transformed token that you transform in such a way that the social media site can recognize that it was made from a legitimate token from the ID checker but does not match anything on the list of tokens that the ID checker has for you.
Is it possible to transform the token such that the social media site would be able to link it to your identity but an attacker who gains access to the social media site's data wouldn't? If so, I'd appreciate an example of a transformation for such a purpose. But it doesn't wipe out my privacy concern, that I - or anyone else - wouldn't be able to log in to a social media site without letting a third party know against my will.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#198This makes me think of how, as a child, every site asked “are you over 13”, and I diligently clicked “yes”. Some more clever sites asked for my birth year… forcing me to do the arduous work of taking the current year and subtracting 14. Though I suppose the real plan here is to pass the law and then have the government selectively prosecute social media companies for having users under 16.
A small transaction would cover 99% of cases (e.g., pay a dollar that's immediately refunded). It would stop kids from casually creating accounts. The kids who can do this are already precocious enough to bypass any other verification steps you could come up with.
Maybe if they use a profile pic that you algorithmically determine is someone underage, you could do some additional checks. The smart ones would learn not to utilize a profile pic of themselves, which would ultimately be better.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Several governments have already effectively banned sites like Pornhub by creating regimes where people have to mail their ID to a central clearinghouse (which creates a huge chilling effect.) The article talks about “reasonable age verification measures” and so saying it’s unenforceable seems a little bit premature. Also, you can bet those measures won’t be in any way reasonable once the Florida legislature gets thr…
You're proving the argument that the parent set forth. Anyone who wants to visit Pornhub can just visit one of the many sites that isn't abiding by the new law. However, that's not due to a lack of legislation, but rather a lack of enforcement, or, perhaps, enforceability. If laws always worked I'd be for more of them. My argument is not that we should never make laws because it's futile but rather that some laws are…
Also social policy enforcement is a generational thing. The UK is only just getting toward outright banning cigarettes by making it illegal for anyone born after X date from ever buying them. Eventually you have a whole generation that isn't exposed to smoking and on the whole thinks the habit is disgusting, which it is.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are consuming nicotine, and tobacco companies are invested in / are the companies producing products in that space. It seems functionally to be the same.
Only if you ignore... a lot. Cancer rates, smoking sections in restaurants, the smell, the yellow grime and used butts sprinkled everywhere, the impact on asthmatics... Smoking a cigarette gets you a lot more than just the nicotine. A smoker moving to vaping is an enormous benefit to health and society.
That sounds like you are being disingenuous. Smoking sections haven't been a thing in the US for a long time (I went to the last one I could find around 2009). Waste from single use vapes is also a huge problem. Similarly there are health effects specific to vaping, time will tell if cancer is among them.