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

Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 345 posts

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#111

Post by lobochrome »

obblekk wrote: post #2

The votes are strong majorities of both houses - great to see a functional democratic government act on such an important issue. They specifically don’t prescribe any particular age verification methods. This would be a great time to follow up with legislation that updates their national IDs to be able to provide cryptographically secure proofs of age without leaking identity. Absent that, I’m sure many of the commen…

Dear god, no. This doesn't need more technology.

The whole purpose of this is only to give parents a reason to say no. Often, a single kid in a class with an unrestricted iPhone is enough to poison the well. Now it's much, much simpler. Kids understand when you say it's against the law.

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#112

Post by Der_Einzige »

threeseed wrote: post #31
Der_Einzige wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. Children deserve rights, representation, and bodily autonomy. Today they have none of this

We need to turn down the volume here. Not being exposed to social networks for a few years is no way comparable to depriving them of bodily autonomy.

No, we need to turn it WAY up. We circumcise AKA male genital mutilation to hundreds of millions of male children all across the world, including much of the USA and Australian populations.

That’s just one tiny example, and no one is calling for circumcison bans simultaneously.

Letting the mutilated children have some social media is the least the state can do for them. Australia is a tyrannical hellscape.

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#113

Post by Aerroon »

poilcn wrote: post #103
voidfunc wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Demonizing social media is this generations version of demonizing rock and roll. It's so tiring.

Is it? You can see the actual harm caused by web sites. Doomscrolling in all age groups. Going to bed very late at night. Girls having body dysmorphia cause of instagram. Young men having porn addition and having no ambition to interact with real women

None of these sound like they are a very big problem compared to many alternative things people do. People talk about social media as though it's lead paint.

I particularly liked that one Facebook study that is usually taken out of context.

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#114

Post by renegat0x0 »

Ahhh yes, and thumbs down button in youtube was removed to protect small creators from harm.

It is funny to observe how many naive people there are in the world.

Australia for years hated the idea that you can anonymously share your opinion.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-07/prime-minister-defend...

And no, privacy is not already lost. It is a lie often said. Sure you share a lot of data about you, but you are often not required, especially by law to share it. Big tech also do not know everything about you, they often lie to shareholders, or advertisers about amount of users, clicks.

Protect the children, and remove the ability to freely express your opinion. I vividly remember people being arrested because of social media activity during covid.

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#116

Post by kreetx »

vinni2 wrote: post #109

But off topic how does selecting for top news work? I posted the same thing 17 hours ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42265447 I posted from BBC is it less reliable source?

I think it's accidental. It depends on upvotes and how quickly they happen to come in.

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#117

Post by Timwi »

turbojet1321 wrote: post #53
lmm wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the opposite of democracy - a group imposing rules "for their own good" on people it doesn't represent who have no recourse. If they had any integrity they'd be banning it for adults not children.

Um, that's exactly what a democracy is - a tyranny of the majority.

You missed the point. Tyranny of the majority is one thing if the minority can at least vote and participate in the political process. Shutting the minority out entirely is quite different.

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#118

Post by wqaatwt »

threeseed wrote: post #52
Der_Einzige wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forced voting is proof of it. Australia is by far the least free Anglo nation. I will never step foot on that god forsaken island. They have no culture, and that’s the opinion of Australians: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lucky_Country https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Australian_Ugliness

Australia is one of the freest countries in the world: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/freest-co... Higher than UK and the US.

> Higher than UK

Not according to https://rsf.org/en/index or https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index

I assume that other indices that show “data” that fits whatever narrative one wants are easy to find…

Which makes things like this meaningless in isolation.

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#119

Post by Der_Einzige »

globalnode wrote: post #106
vermilingua wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has been backdoor(ed|able) for FVEY (via Australia) since 2018. https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/natio...

5y in jail if you refuse to give a password and power to covertly access devices and conceal that fact if they desire. Yikes, they don't mess around.

By far the most bootlicking country in the Anglo world. Disgusting, and their political system should be shattered into the wind

Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s

#120

Post by kreetx »

vermilingua wrote: post #97
globalnode wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was back in 2017 when the govts were all up in arms over encryption. Apparently they don't mind it too much now, which means it all must be back door'able for them.

Has been backdoor(ed|able) for FVEY (via Australia) since 2018. https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/natio...

> over 95 per cent of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation’s (ASIO) most dangerous counter-terrorism targets use encrypted communications

Some humorous sentences in there :).

Post reply on HN