Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

abcnews.go.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 720 posts

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

#621

Post by seattle_spring »

wan23 wrote: post #503

I'd like to see a federal law mandating that any future law or regulation that restricts what children are allowed access to makes the parents solely liable if the children gain access. There should be a standard way to declare pages are age restricted, and the browser on the child's phone or computer should check it. But if the child bypasses that somehow, that's on the parents.

So some loon bans Call of Duty for anyone under 18, but 16-year-old Jonny figures out how to log in anyway at his friend's house. You're championing for a way to indict Jonny's parents on federal charges?

If I'm off base, can you clarify exactly what you would like to see instead?

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

#622

Post by seattle_spring »

proc0 wrote: post #496

I'm calling it now, this is like the War on Drugs. Banning it will only create an underground environment with even less oversight, not to mention the burning desire kids have for doing things they should not be doing, which is guaranteed because this is not even remotely enforceable.

It's so, so obvious. Also strongly reminiscent of the "satanic panic" and the war on violent video games.

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

#623

Post by sangnoir »

mirekrusin wrote: post #609
protocolture wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont want government crapware on my device to access the internet. I also dont want third party crapware on my device to access the internet. "wowee it can be done without revealing my identity to anyone but the government or the corp running the chain" No thanks

Identity is not revealed.

Do you think the NSA would balk at that challenge?

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

#624

Post by vlovich123 »

Aurornis wrote: post #561
vlovich123 wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I mentioned elsewhere, you’re falling for letting perfect be the enemy of good. The ZKP + phone biometrics only needs to raise the cost of bypass above what adolescents have access to. And no, you can’t just share the same ID because there’s revocation support in the mDL and it’s difficult to extract the raw data once it’s stored on the trusted element. This is very similar to how credit cards on phones work which…

Sorry, you’re not thinking like a group of 15 year olds trying to get online. The revocation list means nothing when they can get ahold of someone’s older sibling’s ID and sign up for social media. Did everyone just forget what it’s like to an ambitious kid who wants to get online? Do people really think a platform that needs people to jump through these hoops and use this imaginary international ID architecture is f…

You’re thinking like a group of technically proficient 15 year olds and their friends. That’s a small minority. The vast majority of teens are likely to be stymied.

Revocations are not for the individual ID but if an exploit is found compromising the IDs stored on a trusted element. Your older siblings ID can’t be used to sign for millions of accounts - just those who the older sibling lets borrow their phone that has their ID (and assuming there isn’t some kind of uniqueness cookie that can be used to prevent multiple accounts under a single ID). That’s a much different and more manageable problem (fake ids via older siblings have been a thing for forever).

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

#625

Post by yuliyp »

bennettnate5 wrote: post #480
rndmnflnce wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could even shave a fraction of a penny off with each transaction and they would never notice!

I understand the point you're trying to make with this (social media will definitely abuse the additional knowledge/opportunities they get by having compulsory credit card info), but chargebacks are actually a pretty effective incentive against this. Given that chargeback fees are ~$20-$100 per incidence, you'd only need 5% or less of users calling out the social media site's false charge for that company to be netti…

I think you completely missed the point of the post you replied to (a reference to the plot of the movie Office Space).

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

#626

Post by vlovich123 »

Cheezemansam wrote: post #576
vlovich123 wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I mentioned elsewhere, you’re falling for letting perfect be the enemy of good. The ZKP + phone biometrics only needs to raise the cost of bypass above what adolescents have access to. And no, you can’t just share the same ID because there’s revocation support in the mDL and it’s difficult to extract the raw data once it’s stored on the trusted element. This is very similar to how credit cards on phones work which…

>As I mentioned elsewhere, you’re falling for letting perfect be the enemy of good No, this line of reasoning deserves nothing but absolute contempt when it comes to laws. We are not talking about getting the finnicky API to work at your job. Too often laws have had unintended consequences as a result of loopholes or small peculiarities. If the damn law doesn't even work on a fundamental level then it should be oppos…

You’ve just described literally every single law. Congrats. You’re now appreciating what it’s like to live in a law-based society.

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

#627

Post by Jensson »

jimt1234 wrote: post #540
ceejayoz wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulation worked remarkably well on smoking.

Growing up in the 80s, no one I knew avoided cigarettes because of regulations. Cigarettes were easy to get your hands on as a kid, even though it was illegal to sell to children. We avoided cigarettes because we had a general understanding of the health risks, because we knew our parents would beat our asses if they caught us smoking, and because smoking makes your clothes smell like shit.

Yet that wasn't enough to stop your generation from smoking, they added even more regulations and then the generation after yours stopped.

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

#628

Post by nanolith »

seattle_spring wrote: post #618
nanolith wrote: post #536

The bill is pretty broad, with oddly specific carve-outs. I did not think that I would need to pay for a VPN service to avoid weird legislation in my state, but here we are. The sad thing is that, with the exception of the occasional comment on Slashdot / HN and my LinkedIn profile, I'm barely active on social media anymore. Still, I'm not giving PII to sites that this bill considers "social media" sites, just to pro…

> I did not think that I would need to pay for a VPN service to avoid weird legislation in my state Why not? Were the book bans not a sufficient warning signal?

A warning signal for what? To need a VPN? I was hoping that our current legislators would be unable to spell "Internet", to be honest.

Unfortunately, Florida has gone crazy over the past twenty years. I'd vote with my feet, but this is where my family lives. So, I have little choice but to hunker down and contribute what I can to destabilize the dominant QAnon aligned caucus in the legislature, and hope that in 2026, we get a governor who doesn't play to this nonsense.

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

#629

Post by Beldin »

lukev wrote: post #210
causal wrote: 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,

No, it isn't. Check out Yivi [1]. Its fundamental premise is to not reveal your attributes. It's based on academic work into (a.o.) attribute-based encryption. The professor then took this a step further and spun off a (no profit) foundation to expand and govern this idea.

[1] https://privacybydesign.foundation/irma-explanation/

Post reply on HN