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

From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 150 posts

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#141

Post by inigyou »

Caius-Cosades wrote: post #134
inigyou wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protecting children is a real problem, the internet right now is doing massive damage to everyone (not only children but for some reason we don't protect adults). Opportunists are seeing the opportunity to paperclip mass surveillance onto actual child protection efforts. We can fight this by supporting child protection mechanisms that don't act as mass surveillance, such as the one in California that merely reports w…

Protecting children is not a problem for the government's who are pushing this through. It is, however, a problem for parents. And for the children that are getting the raped. It should be noted that it was not a major priority for government's to bring justice for the victims of the Epstein class or for the 250 thousand children that got sexually abused in the UK.

The Andrew Formerly Known As A Prince got deprinced. I think some countries had actual arrests? It's mostly the USA that pretends it didn't happen.

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#142

Post by inigyou »

pcrh wrote: post #126
inigyou wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter wants to serve children and it also wants to serve porn stars, and there's no good reason it can't do both as long as it keeps them separate, but your proposal doesn't allow it to know who's a child so it can't keep them separate and in response to that it has to ban one or the other from the platform entirely.

Twitter can make a "Kid's Twitter" (Kitter? Kidder?) if it wants. It's far less oppressive than forcing people to reveal their identity to Twitter.

Great now you have two websites. This seems way more inconvenient than simply hiding over18 tweets if the user is a kid?

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#143

Post by inigyou »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #137
inigyou wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But sites don't have categories, they almost all have mixed content. Twitter is social media, but is it also a porn site? Well that depends which account you're viewing. And whether your feed is a porn site can vary every single time you view it.

Then tag each , rather than each site. To make auditing easier, don't have websites as large as Twitter.

If your proposal is to make twitter illegal to protect the children, you're as bad as everyone else who is saying to do dumb things to protect the children

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#144

Post by WithinReason »

beloch wrote: post #139
WithinReason wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. You can't forge a cryptographic signature 2. Fine the parents

Fining parents because of the bad actions of a foreign tech company would generally fit the definition of "political suicide" for any government dumb enough to do it.

How about fining parents because of the bad actions of a foreign tobacco company when they buy cigarettes for their children? Political suicide as well?

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#145

Post by tsoukase »

The players here are the naive and regular non tech savy parents, rigid and burocratic gov orgs and greedy giant companies. What can go wrong?

There must be a culture and unwritten law among all sides. Some general points: 1) more parental control options beyond Family Link 2) totally avoid of flat ID check for all

There are so many minor controlled activities: alcohol, driving, sex and generally controlled: guns, drugs. Just learn from them.

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#146

Post by johneth »

inigyou wrote: post #102
pcrh wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mixed content would have to be tagged as such. Mixed content isn't a problem for broadcast TV or newspapers. They simply avoid publishing material not appropriate for children, e.g. broadcast news programs don't show gore, even when a place has been bombed and is littered with body parts.

Websites mix content far more than TV shows do. Think about the Twitter home page (back when it was Twitter). If someone tweeted something that should be restricted, what do you suggest? Mark the whole page over-18 and effectively ban kids from using Twitter until it falls off the front page? That's ridiculous. Ban people from tweeting over-18 content or hide it from everything except direct links? This is what Twitt…

I think "over-18" posts on X within the feed are hidden behind a "please verify your age" button if you've not verified your age (in UK and parts of EU, probably Australia too). They're intermixed with non-hidden posts.

X lets post authors mark their content as NSFW, and I'd assume they're doing some sort of algorithmic checking or making use of user reports of content to classify content too, to varying degrees of success. It's definitely subject to the whims of the platform owner, given the sheer amount of racism, sexism, and porn that isn't marked.

My account is >18 years old so it never showed up for me (it just used the account age to determine I'm old enough), so I'm going by what others have said.

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#147

Post by inigyou »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #138
inigyou wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think being contacted by or contacting strangers is also a separate concern. Bullying is also a problem.

Strangers are fine. It's strangers in social contexts where strangers can do harm that's the problem. An unsupervised 8-year-old on Hacker News isn't going to get groomed; an 8-year-old on Snapchat might well be.

That's because on HN everyone could see the grooming and call it out - there are no direct messages or private groups.

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#148

Post by inigyou »

johneth wrote: post #146
inigyou wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Websites mix content far more than TV shows do. Think about the Twitter home page (back when it was Twitter). If someone tweeted something that should be restricted, what do you suggest? Mark the whole page over-18 and effectively ban kids from using Twitter until it falls off the front page? That's ridiculous. Ban people from tweeting over-18 content or hide it from everything except direct links? This is what Twitt…

I think "over-18" posts on X within the feed are hidden behind a "please verify your age" button if you've not verified your age (in UK and parts of EU, probably Australia too). They're intermixed with non-hidden posts. X lets post authors mark their content as NSFW, and I'd assume they're doing some sort of algorithmic checking or making use of user reports of content to classify content too, to varying degrees of s…

That's pretty stupid, that means X has to verify your age. If the browser could just send a header saying whether adult content was allowed, the server could just respect that and not verify anyone's age.

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#149

Post by phatfish »

pcrh wrote: post #109
phatfish wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not aware of any "right" to anonymity on the internet.

A right to privacy is one of the fundamental human rights.

Yes, privacy is a right i agree with, but anonymity is not. Especially online where there is no accountability.

Re: From Australia to Europe, countries move to curb children's social media access

#150

Post by [deleted] »

inigyou wrote: post #148
johneth wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "over-18" posts on X within the feed are hidden behind a "please verify your age" button if you've not verified your age (in UK and parts of EU, probably Australia too). They're intermixed with non-hidden posts. X lets post authors mark their content as NSFW, and I'd assume they're doing some sort of algorithmic checking or making use of user reports of content to classify content too, to varying degrees of s…

That's pretty stupid, that means X has to verify your age. If the browser could just send a header saying whether adult content was allowed, the server could just respect that and not verify anyone's age.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN