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

91–100 of 345 posts

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

#91

Post by RichEO »

Terr_ wrote: post #54
kumarvvr wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this approach is that you will have two groups of children, the ones who have access and the ones who don't have access. This is a worse problem than allowing it for all. Its another vector of temptation, distraction, in-equality, etc.

> in-equality If your concern is that some parents will be able to afford to give their children their own devices, but not afford any parental-control software with them... Well, that's better-addressed with an explicit "Digital Tools For Needy Parents" program. If you mean some parents will choose to give their kids more autonomy... Well, isn't it proper for that to be their decision? I have little sympathy for nei…

I don’t think the concern is economic equity, it’s social harm.

Kids whose parents choose to restrict will suffer social consequences vs parents who don’t.

The whole point of the law is to reduce the social harm caused by social media.

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

#92

Post by scripturial »

linuxandrew wrote: post #76
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

Ha! We have compulsory voting but unlike many Anglo countries we don't require voter ID, vote registration etc. In fact you do not need to provide any ID to vote, because voting fraud is so statistically low (see https://www.rmit.edu.au/news/factlab-meta/voting-fraud-negli... ). We simply provide a name and address and fill out the ballot. We have so many issues, but compulsory voting is not one of them, in my opinio…

In Australia they ask to see your ID but you can say you don’t have it on you. I think they mostly just ask for ID so it’s easier to look up your name with the correct spelling.

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

#93

Post by RichEO »

ENGNR wrote: post #70
threeseed wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ASIO has been able to track you for decades since they have real-time metadata feeds from Telstra, Optus, NBN etc. They have access to your location estimate, URLs of sites you've visited, people you talk via email/phone etc. And we know that this dataset is shared to the Five Eyes. So if you are concerned about being tracked I would strongly recommend leaving Australia.

And now they’ll be able to see the groups you go to within pages, read comments, see what we write, etc etc. It also goes from being a defence capability to used for all sorts of things and eventually leaked. It’s not bad enough to leave, better to engage with the politics and try to get some rights before it spreads further outwards

This is conspiracy theory thinking, why on earth would age verification give them access to all of this additional information?

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

#94

Post by globalnode »

vermilingua wrote: post #81
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…

> 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”.

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.

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

#95

Post by ern »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #38
ENGNR wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re a nanny state, the government is just going to use it to track us

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

Compulsory voting means that a large part of the electorate that doesn’t pay attention to politics is easily frightened by scare campaigns.

An example of this is that Australia is sorely in need of tax reform, but any party that pushes for it at state or federal level is damaged at the polls, often fatally.

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

#96

Post by usr1106 »

voidfunc wrote: post #80
kumarvvr wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you protect children from the absolute devastating effects of social media on children, by banning it for adults?

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

The harm of social media is closer to alcohol or tobacco. Addiction, even though with milder physical conseques. Nothing to do with demonizing.

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

#97

Post by vermilingua »

globalnode wrote: post #94
vermilingua wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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”.

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...

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

#98

Post by fraboniface »

arlattimore wrote: post #10

While I appreciate the sentiment of this legislation, removing social media access for everyone under 16 years to address the concerns of a few is a nanny state act. As a parent, you should be making these decisions for your children - not your government. Additionally, I would suggest it won't address the actual issue. The named/identified social media companies will comply as required, younger internet users will s…

It's very hard for parent to resist the insistent demands of their children to get a smartphone when their classmates all have one, and not having one means being or feeling excluded. This is the kind of coordination problem better solved by regulation.

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

#99

Post by ern »

liammclennan wrote: post #87
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

Compulsory voting seems to push against the current trend of political polarization. Also, not sure Australia is, or wants to be, an "Anglo nation".

It’s not polarised, but it is quite sclerotic.

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

#100

Post by ehnto »

linuxandrew wrote: post #62
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…

> 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. Hard disagree. We do not need an internet driver's license. Australians are supposed to have a right to interact with organisations with privacy protections under the…

They can opt out, by not participating with the site. No one is mandated to use social media. But I would also want to see things go the other direction anyway, default to non-algorithmic feeds. Those with the awareness to opt-out are not the people at highest risk.

I agree with basically everything else you said, and I think social media is generally a blight on society. But we can opt-out already, if you are on social media platforms with algo feeds, you are signalling that this works for you. You need to accept that responsibility in the same way it's up to ourselves not to drink 40 beers a day at home.

Post reply on HN