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

711–720 of 720 posts

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

#711

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

giarc wrote: post #106
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Are you a parent? It's not as easy as saying "no social media" to your kids. In this day and age, it's basically equivalent to saying "you can't have friends". Online is where kids meet, hang out, converse etc. I'd LOVE to go back to the days before phones and social media, where kids played with neighbours and ride their bikes to their friends house, but that's slowly slipping away.

>Are you a parent?

I have 5 children. Does that count?

> It's not as easy as saying "no social media" to your kids.

I didn't. I taught them about risks so they'll have tools. But social media isn't where life-changing harm came from.

The harm came from growing up in a world with 24/7 adult presence and zero places to roam. It's development-ruining hellscape that 10k years of children didn't have before.

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

#712

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

brightball wrote: post #92
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your answer is yes? Your position is that decisions about youth access to social media should be fully taken from the parents and made by govs instead. Penalties can be assumed from your examples. This is the reality that you want imposed on parents and children - yes?

Is your position that no age limits should exist for anything?

I never said that. You introduced that notion to the conversation.

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

#713

Post by wrsh07 »

umvi wrote: post #498
wrsh07 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol I just always added 10 to my birth year

Why would you want to make yourself 10 years younger?

I realized the error after submitting (added ten years to my age/subtracted ten years from my birth year), but I didn't think anyone would be confused by it so didn't bother correcting it

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

#714

Post by Jakob-G »

jlokier wrote: post #249
lukev wrote: 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…

> But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet That seems intuitive, but it's not actually true. I suggest looking up zero-knowledge proofs. Using modern cryptography, it is easy to send a machine-generated proof to your social media provider that your government-provided ID says your age is ≥ 16, without revealing anything else about…

But in reality this would not hide age, for example if a child signs up for Facebook, the only information revealed is that they are <16 years old. But once they turn 16, they want to have an unrestricted Facebook experience, so they will send a new token to Facebook, showing that they are older then 16 now. Facebook can now record the day the user does this and will now know the approximate birthday of a person. Sure, the user might not do this right on their birthday, probably in a span of a few weeks, but they will still have a good understanding of the age. This system would still be better then having to reveal your whole Id with all details.

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

#715

Post by s3p »

1shooner wrote: post #117
brightball wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m normally anti-regulation as well, but as a parent I’m fully on board with this. The amount of peer pressure to be on social media is insane.

Because regulation worked so well in eliminating peer pressure for drinking, smoking, and drugs.

Eliminating all laws banning smoking and drinking up until a certain age would not make one single person safer. Are you in favor of parents moderating access to drugs and alcohol for their kids at any age?

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

#716

Post by Tadpole9181 »

tnbp wrote: post #641
Tadpole9181 wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Er... The CA needs to be used to verify the certificate by the third party, ergo it will know the websites. It's virtually impossible to make a verification system that's anonymous. Somewhere the third party and authenticator will need to share a secret that you cannot touch. Furthermore, you would need the government to agree to this system and mandate this system universally and pay for the authentication services…

I can show my government-issued ID to any third party without the government knowing about whom I've shown this ID to. The third party needs to trust the government and the authenticity of the ID. The problem is that my ID contains too much information; I would prefer a document (i.e. digital certificate) that only certifies my age, not my name, address etc.

Any such ID would need to be validated by the service. Therefore the service and the authenticator would need to speak. And in doing so, the authenticator will be able to see that an ID issued to you is being used for that service.

You cannot get around this. The service must confirm with the authenticator. The authenticator must know you are authenticated, and be extension, who you are.

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

#717

Post by averageRoyalty »

thsksbd wrote: post #173
nickthegreek wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone has a credit card. Some people cannot obtain a credit card. People under the age of 18 can also have a credit card. I do not trust random sites with my credit card.

So these are objections in practice, not principle. Important but consider: - Most states give free IDs - Your safety concern is addressed by other commenters here (see the verifying age anonymously)

You understand the intenet isn't made up of US states, right?

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

#718

Post by tnbp »

Tadpole9181 wrote: post #716
tnbp wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can show my government-issued ID to any third party without the government knowing about whom I've shown this ID to. The third party needs to trust the government and the authenticity of the ID. The problem is that my ID contains too much information; I would prefer a document (i.e. digital certificate) that only certifies my age, not my name, address etc.

Any such ID would need to be validated by the service. Therefore the service and the authenticator would need to speak. And in doing so, the authenticator will be able to see that an ID issued to you is being used for that service. You cannot get around this. The service must confirm with the authenticator. The authenticator must know you are authenticated, and be extension, who you are.

Your comment is incompatible with mine, so one of us must be incorrect; I will leave it at that.

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

#719

Post by mirekrusin »

protocolture wrote: post #709
mirekrusin wrote: post #707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government already has all information about you, they put on your passport when they print it for you. Zero knowledge proofs allow you to generate attestation about some facts (ie that you are above 21 years) where 3rd party can verify it, where proof itself doesn’t reveal your identity or any other information - just the fact that you’re passing this check is revealed.

Yes and you can consider the passport office a list of everyone who wants to travel overseas. Ditto, if you apply for internet porn license, you will be on a list of internet porn enthusiasts. Its non trivial information that its largely in your best interest not to provide the government. Again this all happens before your zero knowledge check.

There is no porn enthusiasts list.

To access your fav porn site, you provide claim that you're above 21 that porn site is able to verify.

There is no link revealed between your identity and porn. There are no lists.

Zero-knowledge focuses precisely around this fact of not revealing extra information.

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

#720

Post by djfdat »

apapapa wrote: post #710
djfdat wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this sound like something CA would do? This sounds exactly like something Florida would do.

Because CA bans everything? Pretty much every causes cancer in Cali, for example.

Are you trying to suggest that the warning label that CA added is more similar to the banning of social media for students than banning books in schools, and banning the discussion of certain topics in schools?
Post reply on HN