Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Australia was founded in 1901 as a federation of free states.
More than half of which were penal colonies.
Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
331–340 of 345 posts
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#332As an Australian parent this is really pleasing to see. It's clearly inspired heavily by the work of Jon Haidt and Jean Twenge et al. The kids are not okay and the main thing stopping a worried parent from addressing it is that "all the other kids are on it". If you have an addicted/bullied child would you make them a social pariah and create interminable arguments by taking away their devices? Collective action is n…
As an Australian parent, I'm concerned that there are parents out there who see it as the job of the state to do their job for them.
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you have an addicted/bullied child would you make them a social pariah and create interminable arguments by taking away their devices? Yes. That is literally your job as the parent. If there was some teenage trend of injecting heroin, nobody would accept "but my kid's social life might suffer" as a reason to not stop them from doing heroin. It similarly does not suffice as a reason to not stop your kids from usi…
> > by taking away their devices > That is literally your job as the parent. Tell me you're not a parent without telling me you're not a parent! This only works if there is broad support from the entire social group, meaning school and all (or most) of the other parents. If you try this all alone, all you can accomplish is to apply more suffering to your poor child. For us, here in silicon valley, fortunately that br…
> This only works if there is broad support from the entire social group, meaning school and all (or most) of the other parents.
Which there won't be. Most of these kids have "social media" accounts because their parents allowed it.
To be clear, "social media" for the purposes of this legislation is a VERY broad term that encompasses any almost platform that allows one user to communicate with another.
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an Australian parent, congratulations: you are the problem . I for one was on a public panel with politicians discussing how ridiculous this proposal was, a couple of months ago, before it passed. The government gives all children email addresses while simultaneously banning them from social media. Only a bureaucracy could do this with a straight face. IMHO as a technology-engaged parent the answer to complexity o…
> The government gives all children email addresses while simultaneously banning them from social media. Only a bureaucracy could do this with a straight face. If you think it's email that is causing youth mental health issues then I see why you are confused about my enthusiasm.
Yeah sure, by that logic: what's next, ban networking for septuagenarians? Ban bingo as a dangerous gateway to online gambling? Ridiculous. Or perhaps the ultimate result: a brain license. You can comment online when you can construct a logical argument free of fallacy. Otherwise, stay in your hole. I'm sure society would be much better off with a Truman Show 'constabubble' for all, consuming rehashed and reverberated stereotypical pre-preference like spoonfed semi-souls locked in eternal preteen angst where the illiterati's pop-pinnacle of eloquence is dwelling on the artfully anticipative breathless pause before celebrating the only universally valid response: emotional offense and outrage at anyone or anything that can be construed as threatening the sacred illiterati-ignobubble. Stop being spoon-fed, grow the fork up, pick up the metaphoric knife and teach your kids to use it to pop their own bubble and dissect unfiltered reality: that's the one we actually live in.
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THX_1138 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
So a burner email account? How do you think this is going to work?
You're either going to need to have a Digital Id, such as the Australian Govt myID, or something else to prove you're over 16. A burner email doesn't prove age, and that's what AusGov says they want to do.
That's my point.
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you have an addicted/bullied child would you make them a social pariah and create interminable arguments by taking away their devices? Yes. That is literally your job as the parent. If there was some teenage trend of injecting heroin, nobody would accept "but my kid's social life might suffer" as a reason to not stop them from doing heroin. It similarly does not suffice as a reason to not stop your kids from usi…
And as a parent that duty can be outsourced into legislation and policework. Everyone has a fulltime job- and its okay to limit liberties and delegate.
If a parent forms that view, they should call Child and Youth Protection Services or the equivalent in their state, and offer to delegate the rest of the parenting to the state.
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know? At least in the US, smoking rates dropped substantially by the 1980's, long before many anti-smoking laws were in effect (you could still smoke on planes in the 80's!). https://www.statista.com/statistics/184418/percentage-of-cig...
> In 1970, Congress took their anti-smoking initiative one step further and passed the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act, banning the advertising of cigarettes on television and radio starting on 2 January 1971. In April 1970, President Nixon signed it into law. Can you guys research this stuff before posting, please?
Can you please look at links before commenting?
Do you think the US government passed a law in a vacuum?
The health issues with smoking became well known by the 60s and the number of people smoking was already dropping by the 70’s.
Please don’t make the amateur mistake of confusing correlation with causation.
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#338The 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…
> great to see the government act with expertise I’ve seen the Australian government accused of many things, but that’s certainly a first. This is the same country whose prime minister once said “The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia”.
This came from the less competent conservative government to be fair, although the current one is still very flawed.
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
> functional democratic government Wait, where? Not in my Australia. Saying our govt has any competency is also gobsmacking. Yep, it's better here than other places (for certain groups) but when the notorious hate rag daily mail condemns (literal) neo-nazis marching and saluting in support of transphobe Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull you've really got to question what kind of functional democratic government or expertise l…
Call me oldschool but to me a functioning democracy is where anyone can express their opinions. Neo nazis, zionists, anti zionists, jews, palestinians, socialists, globalists, communists, libertarians etc.
Yes, a functional democracy means neonazis advocating for genociding are protected from the vicious sign holders by the police. Yes, that is definitely a functional democracy. The state defending neonazis from people holding signs is absolutely the free marketplace of ideas in action. Genocide is acceptable if enough people vote for it. Wow, what a great idea!
I one day hope to be so privileged to actually think like that. Give me half a billion dollars and a lobotomy and that's as close as I'll get; I'm not sure it'll be enough.
Re: Australian Parliament bans social media for under-16s
#340The 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…
I highly doubt they have the expertise to implement anything remotely 'cryptographic.' Their level of competence seems stuck in the 1950s, stamping paper forms, while anything more complex is handed off to consultants in Australia. These consultants appear far more interested in lining their pockets than in understanding technology or math. The far more likely scenario is they piss a couple of hundred billion away on…
I was too right, they already selected a slick sounding half baked platform: https://accscheme.com/