Live data from Hacker News

Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

abcnews.go.com

291–300 of 720 posts

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#291
post #210
post #36

I 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…

But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff, but that any of these laws will either be (a) unenforceable and useless, or (b) draconian and…

> destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.)

The First Amendment guarantees free expression, not anonymous expression.

For example, there are federal requirements for identification for political messages. [1] These requirements do not violate the First Amendment.

[1] https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/advertisi...

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#292

Perhaps a better solution is to allow children on social media, but drastically limit how companies are allowed to interact with such accounts. Random ideas: no ads, no messages from people they don't follow, limit ability to follow other accounts in some way.

Children are not as much at danger from falling for online advertisements as they are for the overall detrimental effects of social media in general. Social networks are inherently bad for kids; they are addictive and directly harm children by constantly dosing them with dumb entertainment and cutting off their attention spans.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#293
post #210
post #36

I 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…

But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff, but that any of these laws will either be (a) unenforceable and useless, or (b) draconian and…

> But the only way to do this is to require ID checks

Not necessarily, consider the counterexample of devices with parental-controls which--when locked--will always send a "this person is a minor" header. (Or "this person hits the following jurisdictional age-categories", or some blend of enough detail to be internationally useful and little-enough to be reasonably private and not-insane to obey.)

That would mostly puts control into the hands of parents, at the expense of sites needing some kind of code-library that can spit out a "block or not" result.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#294
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Would you care to elaborate?

Say you have a user U who wishes to demonstrate to site S that they are at least 16, and we have a site G that already has a copy of U's government ID information.

Here's one way to do it, with an important security measure omitted for now for simplicity.

• S gives U a token.

• U gives G that token and shows G their ID.

• G verifies that U is at least 16, and then signs the token with a key that they only use for "over 16" age verifications. The signed token is given back to U.

• U gives the signed token back to S.

If G saves a list of tokens it signs and who it signed them for, and S saves a list of tokens it issues and what accounts it issued them for, then someone who gets both of those lists could look for tokens that appear on both in order to match up S accounts with real IDs.

To prevent that we have to make an adjustment. G has to sign the token using a blind signature. A blind signature is similar to a normal digital signature, except the the signer does not see the thing they are signing. All they see is an encrypted copy of the thing.

With that change a breach of G just reveals that you had your age verified and gives the encrypted token associated with that verification. These no longer match what is in the records of the sites you proved your age to since they only have the non-encrypted tokens.

Someone with both breaches might be able to match up timestamps, so even though they can't match the tokens from S directly with the encrypted tokens from G they might note that you had your age verified at time T, and so infer that you might be the owner of one of the S accounts that had a token created before T and returned after T.

This would be something people trying to stay anonymous would have to be careful with. Don't go through the full signup as fast as possible--wait a while before getting the token signed, and wait a while before returning the signed token. Then someone who is looking at a particular anonymous S account will have a much larger list of items in the G breach that have a consistent timestamp.

Also note that to G it is just being asked to sign opaque blobs. Occasionally have G sign random blobs. If your G data shows that you are getting your age verified a few times a month, then it is even more likely that if one of those verifies is at about the same time as a particular social media signup it is just a coincidence.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you asserting that parents should not have the rights to determine this for their own children?

Do you also think that children should be allowed to buy cigarettes? I'll be honest, I am not certain that social media is any less deleterious than tobacco. I'm a pretty pro-market guy, but there are times when the interests of the market are orthogonal to the interests of mankind.

I can pretty confidently say that the half a million deaths a year attributable to smoking is a little more deleterious than getting bullied online and the suicides which follow. Many orders of magnitude more.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaping isn't the same thing as smoking.

I agree it is different, but the jury is out on whether it is better. Banning "social media" is likely to push users to a "lite" version of it. I'm not convinced that will be better.

I would call IRC "social media lite", and it is indeed better.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#297
post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff, but that any of these laws will either be (a) unenforceable and useless, or (b) draconian and…

You know, I'm not really sure that requiring IDs for access to porn / social media is a terrible idea. Sure it's been anonymous and free since the advent of the internet, but perhaps it's time to change that. After all, we don't allow a kid into a brothel or allow them to engage in prostitution (for good reasons), and porn is equally destructive. But with the topic at hand being social media, I think a lot of the sam…

[dead]

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#298
post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff, but that any of these laws will either be (a) unenforceable and useless, or (b) draconian and…

You know, I'm not really sure that requiring IDs for access to porn / social media is a terrible idea. Sure it's been anonymous and free since the advent of the internet, but perhaps it's time to change that. After all, we don't allow a kid into a brothel or allow them to engage in prostitution (for good reasons), and porn is equally destructive. But with the topic at hand being social media, I think a lot of the sam…

You think watching porn is equally destructive to engaging in prostitution? I'd hate to see what kind of porn you're watching.

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#299
post #286

Technical implementation looks like a good use case for this, morals/etc aside - https://developers.google.com/privacy-sandbox/protections/pr... Private State Tokens enable trust in a user's authenticity to be conveyed from one context to another, to help sites combat fraud and distinguish bots from real humans—without passive tracking. An issuer website can issue tokens to the web browser of a user who shows that th…

Yep - one of those "it's possible but do we want this" situations. Something feels a bit slimy about government-approved browser tokens. Like,

"We're sorry, your revocation appeal is taking longer than expected due to ongoing unrest in your area - please refrain from using internet enabled services like ordering food, texting friends, uploading livestream videos of police, giving legal advice, finding directions to your employer - a nonprofit legal representation service, or contacting high-volume providers like the ACLU. Have a nice day!"

But it could just be "Please execute three pledges of allegiance to unlock pornhub"

Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16

#300
post #210
post #36

I 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…

But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff, but that any of these laws will either be (a) unenforceable and useless, or (b) draconian and…

The definition of "social media" in this bill actually seems to exempt anonymous social networks since it requires the site "Allows an account holder to interact with or track other account holders".
Post reply on HN