History rhymes.
They killed Socrates to protect the youth of Athens.
The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
461–470 of 598 posts
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#462Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of studies came out kinda at the same time showing how harmful it is and people aren’t coming up with alternatives. What else can you do?
I had an idea the other day that children could have some kind of jewellery that they can't remove like a curfew device. Probably impractical but at least it matches - children=limited rights and need protection. Once of age, no need, come of age, can remove.
stupid idea
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#463Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you're a concerned parent: set your children's ages in their device accounts. And if you're a concerned government, make OS vendors support it and make parents criminally responsible for not setting it.
Aren't parents already responsible for protecting their kids well-being legally?
There is nuance here, especially when it comes to schools. And it certainly depends on what country/jurisdiction we're talking about, in terms of actual legal duties of parents.
The school admins and teachers act in loco parentis when the child is in their custody, on their property etc. So, schools are often tasked with making difficult parentage decisions for children, and sometimes before the parents themselves can be looped in.
A notable tension today exists with gender identity, and whether schools should be compelled to always share the student's secrets with parents, or if the schools have a solemn duty to try and protect children's confidentiality and safety in this regard.
Another tension exists with medical care in hospitals. Once a child is admitted to the hospital, do the parents still have 100% control over life-saving treatments? Can the parents withdraw ordinary life-sustaining care? Can the hospital tell the parents when the child is "brain dead" or in a PVS, and can the parents go find a second opinion?
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#464Anybody else think it is weird that suddenly all Western countries suddenly want to lockdown the internet to "protect the children"? There is surely an international special interest group lobbying for this?
It’s not for the kids. That’s just the excuse. In order to validate kids, they really need to identify everyone. That’s the real play.
In Australia, the government has certified OAuth2 Identity Providers which act as a broker between social media sites and a provider that can verify your age, such as a bank. This allows age to be verified by a provider, with the social media provider having no access to your identity. If the social media companies chose to support this, they would be complying with the legislation. It's not the government forcing you to identify yourself.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#465Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meta is publicly posting ads in Europe promoting age verification, so yes Meta is a part of the problem.
What does Meta get out of enacting mass surveillance of the entire Western world (not even for their personal benefit)? That they can avoid spending 6 months implementing ID checks like porn sites have done? Also can I see an example of those ads? Google isn’t surfacing anything relevant
Answering this point directly, not the full argument.
If Meta bans young people from their platforms, young people will just go to a different platform, and then Meta loses a generation of customers.
But if the age blocking affects all platforms, then the playing field is kept equal with respect to age blocking.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#466One step closer to the great exile from the clearnet. I'd say "accelerate".
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#467Earlier quoted context omitted.
That Facebook story is an AI generated attempt at astroturf that has gone viral, but we shouldn’t probably continue perpetuating it. It is not Meta working across the globe because they’re too lazy to implement age verification. Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48708278
Meta is actively sponsoring the bills in my country. They go as far as ads on TV and Radio, something that never happened before
But in Australia they're actively fighting against it. Why?
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#468Anybody else think it is weird that suddenly all Western countries suddenly want to lockdown the internet to "protect the children"? There is surely an international special interest group lobbying for this?
Too many people expressing themselves on the internet with nothing that can be done against them... From a government perspective, it is a gold mine to know who's on the internet. For advertisers it is another goldmine - you can target at will without having to figure out first some demographics. An probably there are some angles I don't yet see, but the fact that this is a concentrated effort across the world make m…
For the deep-pocked advertisers, this is a loss.
Because big players have systems to fill in those information gaps, they have a moat that protects their position in the market.
If the data were instead just handed over, that would weaken those moats.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#469Anybody else think it is weird that suddenly all Western countries suddenly want to lockdown the internet to "protect the children"? There is surely an international special interest group lobbying for this?
A lot of studies came out kinda at the same time showing how harmful it is and people aren’t coming up with alternatives. What else can you do?
> What else can you do?
Educate the parents maybe?
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#470Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rshc1f/i_traced_2_b...
I originally read it as EVIL/UPDATE. Anyway, Meta, really? Just to have more of our data? For the absolutely pedestrian explicit purpose of providing more information to advertisers? This is why I don't buy into conspiracy theories. The truth is typically really boring and predictable - evil corporations will evily corporate. I half wish for a more exciting villain that would give people a noticeable reason to stand…
Meta can figure out the information about users that helps it target ads. That’s one of their moats.
Giving advertisers demographic information outright would actually weaken Meta’s moat.