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

Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#291

Post by Elfener »

chrismorgan wrote: post #129

A paragraph from an email Reddit sent me presumably because I created my account in Australia: > Users confirmed to be under 16 will have their accounts suspended under the new Australian minimum age law. While we disagree with the Government's assessment of Reddit as being within the scope of the law, we need to take steps to comply. This means anyone in Australia with a Reddit account confirmed to be under 16 will…

> I wonder if allowing browsing without an account is compliant with the letter or the spirit of the law

Haven't read the law, but I don't think they considered this, since the most popular social media sites make it very hard or impossible to browse without an account. I guess with adult content bans they do consider this, since people don't tend to make an account there.

And a very similar fun fact: You can't browse facebook marketplace if you're logged into an under 18 account, but can without an account (at least here in Hungary).

Somehow, things are going to work better when you're not logged in...

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#292

Post by gloosx »

"It's just kind of pointless, we're just going to create new ways to get on these platforms, so what's the point," said 14-year-old Claire Ni.

Claire Ni concluded it best. They are just going to find new ways. Imagine a kid stopping using something because of the law or government ban. Those lawmakers are just delusional if they think they can pass a law and the kids will stop using social media.

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#293

Post by Sevrene »

jfindper wrote: post #239
Sevrene wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think we should normalise children on platforms where the content contains political agitation, sexual and violent content, crypto and fintech scams, etc. Especially when this content is packaged up to them and commodified. These platforms make more money than the ATO (Australian Tax Office) brings in a year. I think they have the moral obligation and means to create safer spaces- either inside or seperate fr…

> If you look back at vox pops from when drink-driving laws were introduced, or when seatbelts became mandatory, or when ID requirements were tightened, the arguments for and against were eerily similar. If you think the arguments are eerily similar, I feel like you haven't really been listening to the arguments against these types of age-verification-for-websites laws. I mean, there's some similarities, of course. B…

>I feel like you haven't really been listening to the arguments against these types of age-verification-for-websites laws.

Or maybe I just have a different conclusion to you? Because I do care, I do try to listen to the arguments. I'm no stranger to advocacy for civil liberties, they are important to me. I think all else being equal, freedom should be valued more over harm prevention. So if I'm for these laws, consider that a sign of how bad these sites have become, not how uninformed I am.

> I mean, there's some similarities, of course. But I think there are some very stark differences.

Yep of course it's not a 1:1, I agree. I don't mean to imply that people saying the same arguments today are wrong simply because people in the past were, but it does make me think more about it when I spot the same rhetoric.

Often both sides have very reasonable concerns, as an example, the question isn't "should we have all or no freedom" Either extreme creates issues, yet both sides have valid arguments worth our time considering. We settle somewhere in the middle.

Here's one vox pop with the introduction of breathalizers in UK (1967): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_tqQYmgMQg

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#294

Post by someNameIG »

subscribed wrote: post #166
deminature wrote: post #16

As an Australian experiencing this first hand and considerably older than 16, absolutely nothing has changed. It seems like all the social networks are doing age estimation of accounts and only taking action on those that fail and are detected as underage. The change is otherwise completely invisible if you're an adult user. Obviously I'm only a sample size of 1, but I've not heard of any other adults being adversely…

I'm an adult, not living in Australia, and yet my backup Roblox account has been barred from using any form of in-app chat unless I send my face and ID to some third party service. All of my (adult) friends living in AU had to perform various forms of age checks on almost all platforms they used, which seems to be very far from invisible. I'd much prefer anonymous, safe, reliable age checks (that can be done!) that d…

As an Australian the only platforms I have that asked for an age check were Discord and Bluesky. Which is funny as neither came under this legislation, they're implementing this because they chose to.

Nothing from Reddit or any of the Meta platforms which have to comply with this legislation.

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#295

Post by stevage »

hearsathought wrote: post #242
mullingitover wrote: post #71

Florida passed a similar law, and a bunch of other states are attempting to but are blocked by federal courts. Will be interesting to see if the tech industry allows it, or decides to break up the federal government before it becomes too powerful.

> Florida passed a similar law, and a bunch of other states are attempting to but are blocked by federal courts. When much of government ( federal, state, local ) communication is done via social meda, would it be legal to ban anyone from accessing it? Or are official government social media sites required to be accessible to everyone?

The Australian ban doesn't block anyone from accessing content.

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#296

Post by morshu9001 »

gloosx wrote: post #292

"It's just kind of pointless, we're just going to create new ways to get on these platforms, so what's the point," said 14-year-old Claire Ni. Claire Ni concluded it best. They are just going to find new ways. Imagine a kid stopping using something because of the law or government ban. Those lawmakers are just delusional if they think they can pass a law and the kids will stop using social media.

If it has no effect, why complain?

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#297

Post by swiftcoder »

stevage wrote: post #290
feb012025 wrote: post #161

I feel like everyone in this thread is assuming this is a good faith move by Australia to help kids in school and with socialization. I think phones and social media are harmful, but I get the sense there's a political motive behind this. We've been hearing politicians complain for years that they're losing the youth when it comes to long-standing foreign policy positions, etc... And suddenly they ban social media. R…

> We've been hearing politicians complain for years that they're losing the youth when it comes to long-standing foreign policy positions I have literally never heard this. The ban doesn't stop teens consuming social media content like tik tok. Your argument seems like quite a stretch.

> The ban doesn't stop teens consuming social media content like tik tok.

That is exactly what the ban aims to do? TikTok is literally listed in the article as one of the platforms ordered to ban access by under-16s

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#298

Post by observationist »

feb012025 wrote: post #161

I feel like everyone in this thread is assuming this is a good faith move by Australia to help kids in school and with socialization. I think phones and social media are harmful, but I get the sense there's a political motive behind this. We've been hearing politicians complain for years that they're losing the youth when it comes to long-standing foreign policy positions, etc... And suddenly they ban social media. R…

It's four horsemen of the infocalypse 101. Look at the platforms they allowed to continue - discord and roblox, the specific worst of all socials with the most predators, least effective countermeasures.

The purpose of a thing is what it does. Australia's policies do not protect children. They quite brazenly and blatantly leave children vulnerable and exploited. The question of what those actions accomplish has a simple answer - narrative control, censorship, and weaponization of public discourse against dissent.

The real solution to these problems are cultural. If you want the best outcomes for kids, then reinforce stable loving family environments, empower a culture of resilience and competence and capability, impose accountability for wrongdoing, negligence, and careless operation. If teachers and families are leaving kids vulnerable, the solution is better education and more information.

None of the policy Australia crafted does anything good. It's just another power grab using "won't you think of the children?!" as the excuse. Next year it will be terrorism or drugs or money laundering, and they'll keep constricting around civil liberties until they have absolute control.

They'll also put various racial and ethnic officials in prominent positions, so that you may not criticize anything lest you be deemed a racist or bigot (super effective social engineering.)

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#299

Post by lisbbb »

gspencley wrote: post #254
feb012025 wrote: post #161

I feel like everyone in this thread is assuming this is a good faith move by Australia to help kids in school and with socialization. I think phones and social media are harmful, but I get the sense there's a political motive behind this. We've been hearing politicians complain for years that they're losing the youth when it comes to long-standing foreign policy positions, etc... And suddenly they ban social media. R…

In most legal jurisdictions that I know of, kids aren't legally allowed to be able to access to pornography either. How is that working out? The only way to even attempt to enforce these things is with government mandated age verification. Few people want that as it represents a massive violation of privacy and effectively makes anonymity on the Internet impossible.

I don't see the danger of pornography, tbh. Oh, much of it is sick, sure, but violent video games are far more harmful. Would it be better to depict loving, caring relationships? Hell, yes! But there are so few of those these days.

My teenage son struggles to have any meaningful dialog with any of the girls his age. It's like he doesn't exist. The few kids who are "dating" is basically the exact scenario that MGTOW depicts--girls only go for the elite jocks and ignore everyone else like they don't even exist. Everyone is miserable. Many will eventually grow out of it, but I don't think the females will ever view themselves as doing anything but "settling" because of the nonsense programmed into their heads. And yes, social media is largely responsible for how extreme the situation has become. In the 90s, girls were picky, but nothing like now. So all that young men have left is like AI chatbots and porn and it's better to not take that away from them, too.

Re: Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban

#300

Post by morshu9001 »

robryan wrote: post #245
rpmisms wrote: post #224

Discord and Roblox exempted. This is a joke.

To include discord you have to extend it to messaging services. To include Roblox it should be all online games with chat.

When I was a kid, online games with chat were a no-no. Most of the ones designed for kids specifically avoided having a chat feature aside from preset phrases, like Toon Town.

Then of course by teens, most boys were in the notorious MW2 lobbies.

Post reply on HN