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

Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 498 posts

Re: Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

#331

Post by interactivecode »

Aurornis wrote: post #312
pimterry wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every single Australian's ID will have to be verified (in order to confirm their age). > > Depending on the degree of cooperation (/coercion) the Australian government has with social media companies, the Aus Govt will be able to access citizen social media data with relative ease. So no more pseudo anonymous accounts (or, at least, they'll be made more difficult, especially for non-technical folk). This isn't a gi…

This comes up on every single HN thread about the topic, but I don’t understand how people aren’t seeing the obvious abuse angle: Create a market for anonymous age verification tokens. People pay $5 to someone to create an age authorization for them. 17 year old kid (who is old enough under this law) spends all day creating anonymous age auth tokens to sell to people who want them. Entire system subverted with profit…

this is the same argument as "why have government id cards, someone could just use a fake beard and use their older classmates id". Any system allows for some gaps, similar to how creditcard transactions make transactions safer but on either side of that transaction there some "insurance" and some leeway if someone really wanted to.

Re: Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

#332

Post by akudha »

alt227 wrote: post #174
akudha wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started losing faith in democracy since Brexit. It is still better than other forms of governance, that seems like a low bar. People making “protest” votes without bothering to understand the consequences, single issue voters, young people who don’t even bother to vote, dumb/racist/misogynist voters… Democracy only works if voters take it seriously, only if media is at least reasonably honest/competent etc. Across…

> dumb/racist/misogynist voters… > Democracy only works if voters take it seriously Do you mean democracy only works when all people vote for options that you think are sensible? Im afraid you seem to have the wrong end of the stick when it comes to democracy. The whole point of it is that everyone, including people you disagree with, get to have a say. Calling people names like dumb and racist is just a crass result…

I was working in Mississippi during 2016 election. I met many people who point blank told me they will not vote for Clinton, just because she is a woman (there are a million reasons not to vote for Clinton, her gender is not one of them). What should we call such people?

Do you mean democracy only works when all people vote for options that you think are sensible?

How did you deduce that from my comment? Just one day after Brexit, tons of people regretted voting to leave - lots of them admitted they didn't take the vote seriously, they thought others would vote to stay, so their vote wouldn't matter. A serious voter would have voted on the merits of staying or leaving the EU, not because they were angry at some politician or some other policy <-- This is what I meant when I said "Democracy only works if voters take it seriously", I don't know how you deduced that I want everyone to vote the way I want them to.

Re: Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

#334

Post by ensignavenger »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #272
ensignavenger wrote: post #267

'"Messaging apps," "online gaming services" and "services with the primary purpose of supporting the health and education of end-users" will not fall under the ban, as well as sites like YouTube that do not require users to log in to access the platform.' So they tell us which social media is excluded, but not the definition of "social media" for what is included? Does anyone know how "social media" is being defined…

This is a genuinely relevant question given that HN could be easily argued to be social media. For the record, I too am concerned about social media impact and so on ( for good and valid reasons ), but this law does not seem that great at first glance.

Hacker News doesn't require a login to view content, so I guess it is exempt, from this specific law.

Re: Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

#335

Post by idunnoman1222 »

interactivecode wrote: post #324
idunnoman1222 wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proving identity is a hard problem. What’s to stop a kid from grabbing his father’s drivers license and setting up this wallet because eg his father is never going to do it Secondarily what’s to stop an 18-year-old having hundreds of tiktok accounts and selling them for a dollar to whatever kid wants at is high school every social media site is going to have to implement Australia’s 2fa system?

aside from limitations like, you can only setup 1 app, or things like 2f authentication. Usually things like this are stopped by laws and enforcement causing consequences. I'm pretty sure that sort of thing would be considered identity theft. same thing as stealing their father's drivers license and opening bank accounts in their name. There are physical barriers and there are barriers that are enforced manually. Sam…

I don’t get it so you’re gonna do what to a 15-year-old who is an ‘identity thief’ so that he can go on TikTok? What’s the punishment please?

Re: Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

#336

Post by lstodd »

idunnoman1222 wrote: post #335
interactivecode wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

aside from limitations like, you can only setup 1 app, or things like 2f authentication. Usually things like this are stopped by laws and enforcement causing consequences. I'm pretty sure that sort of thing would be considered identity theft. same thing as stealing their father's drivers license and opening bank accounts in their name. There are physical barriers and there are barriers that are enforced manually. Sam…

I don’t get it so you’re gonna do what to a 15-year-old who is an ‘identity thief’ so that he can go on TikTok? What’s the punishment please?

Put them in chains and onto a stinky sail vessel enroute to Australia... oh wait

Re: Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

#338

Post by johnisgood »

acdha wrote: post #185
johnisgood wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discord is for people over 13 years of age in many countries, yet there are many minors there. It is not working.

I’m not saying anything about specific services, only that there is a legitimate concern which can’t simply be dismissed without reason.

I am not sure I meant to reply to you, to be honest. It is an issue but so far the solutions are terrible. Outsourcing parenting to the Government or companies is also meh. I am sure there are parents who know of ways to reduce screen time for their children, it ranges from installing a program that does not let you on a website or start another program until and unless this and that, or take the phone from the kid's hand and go for a walk or study, whatever.

Re: Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

#339

Post by ruthmarx »

nomilk wrote: post #175

Every single Australian 's ID will have to be verified (in order to confirm their age). Depending on the degree of cooperation (/coercion) the Australian government has with social media companies, the Aus Govt will be able to access citizen social media data with relative ease. So no more pseudo anonymous accounts (or, at least, they'll be made more difficult, especially for non-technical folk). Reminds of the 'chil…

Australians with dual citizenship have an out at least.

Re: Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media after Senate passes laws

#340

Post by arresin »

mickeyfrac wrote: post #248
nomilk wrote: post #175

Every single Australian 's ID will have to be verified (in order to confirm their age). Depending on the degree of cooperation (/coercion) the Australian government has with social media companies, the Aus Govt will be able to access citizen social media data with relative ease. So no more pseudo anonymous accounts (or, at least, they'll be made more difficult, especially for non-technical folk). Reminds of the 'chil…

How many under 16s read newspapers or watch news anyway? All you need to do is look up the mental health stats since the iPhone release to see why parents are massively concerned. There has never been a time when an alert parent didn’t have a fair idea of what info a kid was exposed to. This is why going to university is such an awakening. Now the parents basically need a background in infosec to stop their kids acce…

I think that’s the cover story (because I agree it’s extremely valid).
Post reply on HN