Australia widens teen social media ban to YouTube, scraps exemption

Post by SlowTao » Thu, Jul 31, 2025, 8:15 AM UTC

jay_kyburz wrote: post #106

SilverElfin wrote: post #62

Why are so many countries like Australia, UK, EU, etc suddenly pro censorship. Aren’t these all liberal democracies? I would think these policies would be very unpopular. Is there some analysis of how this came to be normalized?

I'm an everyday Australian, I'll take a few guesses. (I don't support these new laws) 1. we don't have as an antagonistic relationship with our government and we trust that most of what will be banned will be gross stuff we don't want weirdos watching. 2. I think most people feel social media really is breaking young people, and its easier if all kids are banned than just trying to ban your own kids. It's really hard…

Post by isaacremuant » Thu, Jul 31, 2025, 8:19 AM UTC

southernplaces7 wrote: post #300

Idiocy beyond reason. The Australian population seems to have fallen to the same mental illness of their UK cousins, of letting the nannying state pry into every facet to their lives and treat them like stupid little children, even in very basic elements of giving teenagers and kids some modicum of autonomy (with a nice mass potential surveillance cherry on top). For one thing, among all its garbage content, like the…

Post by somedude895 » Thu, Jul 31, 2025, 8:19 AM UTC

seydor wrote: post #31

This is raising a generation of radicalized teens with institutionalized hatred against the older generation. Will end well

Post by 28304283409234 » Thu, Jul 31, 2025, 8:24 AM UTC

LexiMax wrote: post #243

28304283409234 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My teens, and each one I have encountered through them, cannot discern a pixel from a wallsocket. They are tech consumers. Not tech savvy. My dad (82) is more tech savvy.

They're not tech savvy because they didn't need to be. That will change. One thing that has not changed from our parents generation to our generation to the upcoming generations is that teenagers will be troublemakers, push boundaries, get caught doing a number of things that displease you, and get away with many more things that you won't find out about for decades - if ever.

Post by defrost » Thu, Jul 31, 2025, 8:28 AM UTC

lesuorac wrote: post #398

I'm kinda surprised that the rightsholders don't try to push the accountability onto the ISPs. The ISPs are giving the individuals their licence plates (IP Addresses) so are in a good spot to say this IP is allowed to access X content. For devices being a NAT then the local router can provide that information to the ISP to forward to the service.

  This case is important in copyright law of Australia because it tests copyright law changes required in the Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement, and set a precedent for future law suits about the responsibility of Australian Internet service providers with regards to copyright infringement via their services.

  The managing director of iiNet, Michael Malone, claimed that "iiNet cannot disconnect a customer's phone line based on an allegation. The alleged offence needs to be pursued by the police and proven in the courts. iiNet would then be able to disconnect the service as it had been proven that the customer had breached our Customer Relations Agreement,"