Now platforms have to figure out how to enforce it.
      • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        21 days ago

        I don’t see many options between asking for a birthdate and asking for ID for this problem. I don’t see any way that this can be enforced that isn’t problematic.

        • JeremyHuntQW12@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          21 days ago

          I don’t see many options between asking for a birthdate and asking for ID for this problem. I don’t see any way that this can be enforced that isn’t problematic.

          The senate inquiry outlined the two likely solutions :

          1. Uploading ID to the website.

          2. 3D face scanning. This will include continual monitoring so if another person comes into view they will have to face scan in. Remember, its prohibited for chidren to even watch prohibited content with their parents.

        • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
          01·
          21 days ago

          Facebook/Meta has developed software to estimate the age from a video.

          I don’t see any way that this can be enforced that isn’t problematic.

          Comes with the territory. The point is to control who has access to what information so that they don’t get wrong ideas.

          • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            20 days ago

            if you think AI software will be able to differentiate between a 15 year old and 16 year old then I have this cool bridge in Brooklyn that you might be interested in.

            This is delusional to the point where it feels like we’re literally devolving.

  • ouch@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    20 days ago

    I don’t think there is a technical way to implement this without privacy issues and potential for future misuse and scope creep.

    Government doing parenting instead of the parents never works.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      01·
      19 days ago

      I mean, yeah. But also, this isn’t really any different from kids not being allowed to drink alcohol before a specific age, movies and video games having age minima, etc etc.

      And I would surmise the same reasoning applies: On average, someone so young has neither the mental development nor the life experience to be able to judge well what they are doing with their own information and how to judge/process the information they get shown.

      Of course, this should happen in conjunction with actual education, like I at least had for alcohol and stuff. But it’s an entirely normal thing if it happens as part of a multi-step process (and I am not australian enough to judge how well those things work out in australia in general).

      • ouch@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        19 days ago

        But it IS different. If you compare to alcohol for example, age checks are performed in shops. No record of those is made or available to anyone. There is no centralized infrastructure related to age checks that could be abused in the future to track everyone who buys alhocol.

  • Chick3nDinn3r@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    20 days ago

    What the government should be doing is mandating that a social media/drugs literacy course is taught in schools. Kids should fundamentally understand that things are not black or white, good or bad; things are grey. They have upsides and downsides; risks and rewards. Kids should be taught that Social media is a great way to connect with your friends, but you are also susceptible to being influenced/manipulated/addicted in X, Y, Z ways.

    • Moghie@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      20 days ago

      100% agree. I think it’s a good space for libraries to enter too. Internet literacy, media literacy and critical thinking skills are sorely needed to be taught today.

  • MimicJar@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    21 days ago

    the rules are expected to apply to the likes of Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok, per the Prime Minister.

    Sites used for education, including YouTube, would be exempt, as are messaging apps like WhatsApp.

    The law does not require users to upload government IDs as part of the verification process.

    Sounds like a pretty weak law. It will require a birthday when creating an account and accounts under the age of 16 will be restricted/limited. As a result users (people under 16) will lie about their age.

    Companies don’t like this because it messes with their data collection. If they collect data that proves an account is under 16 they will be required to make them limited/restricted. However they obviously collect this data already.

    I wonder if Facebook and other apps will add/push education elements in order to become exempt.

      • MimicJar@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        21 days ago

        Oh I agree. I wouldn’t want a stronger law. I’m just not too concerned with this one. I think if there are concerns with social media we should discuss how to solve them for everyone.

        We generally say 16-21 you are an adult so fuck it, whatever happens to you is your fault and ignore the predatory nature of organizations.

        We should outline the specific concerns and determine what, if any, steps we can take.

        As an example, gambling. I think it’s fair and reasonable to allow gambling. I think ensuring gambling isn’t predatory is a reasonable limitation. I expect for most people it isn’t a problem but I think providing help to gambling addicts is also reasonable. Social media should be viewed through a similar lens.

  • rcbrk@lemmy.mlEnglish
    1·
    21 days ago

    The ban and age verification requirements apply to pretty much all services which allow communication of information between people, unless an exemption is granted by the minister.

    There is no legislated exemption for instant messaging, SMS, email, email lists, chat rooms, forums, blogs, voice calls, etc.

    It’s a wildly broadly applicable piece of legislation that seems ripe to be abused in the future, just like we’ve seen with anti-terror and anti-hate-symbol legislation.

    From 63C (1) of the legislation:

    For the purposes of this Act, age-restricted social media platform means:

    • a) an electronic service that satisfies the following conditions:
      • i) the sole purpose, or a significant purpose, of the service is to enable online social interaction between 2 or more end-users;
      • ii) the service allows end-users to link to, or interact with, some or all of the other end-users;
      • iii) the service allows end-users to post material on the service;
      • iv) such other conditions (if any) as are set out in the legislative rules; or
    • b) an electronic service specified in the legislative rules; but does not include a service mentioned in subsection (6).

    Here’s all the detail of what the bill is and the concerns raised in parliament.

  • Zozano@lemy.lolEnglish
    1·
    21 days ago

    Obviously there are workarounds, but I suppose it provides a good justification for parents to deny their kids access to social media.

      • crapwittyname@lemm.eeEnglish
        1·
        20 days ago

        Peer pressure is real. Kids get social media accounts way too early because it’s difficult to justify holding off when all of their classmates have them. It causes actual social issues for kids when they are the only one without something. They get bullied etc, so parents are effectively forced to accede. Making it illegal gives parents a reason to say no, which might slow down the uptake.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      0·
      20 days ago

      In my country they talked about this. And they thought of a different approach.

      The government were to emit anonymous digital certificates after validate your identity. And then the websites were only required to validate these anonymous digital certificates.

      Or even it was talk that the government could put a certificate validation in front of the affected ip.

      So the bussiness won’t have your ip. Only a verification by the government that you are indeed over certain age.

  • Juigi@lemm.eeEnglish
    1·
    20 days ago

    What they consider as “social media”? Is it every site where you can communicate with others?

    This seems fucked if its so.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0·
    20 days ago

    This is technically feasible, and bussiness don’t need to know your id. If anonymous government certificates are issued.

    But I’m morally against it. We need to both educate on the dangers of internet and truly control harmful platforms.

    But just locking it is bad for society. What happens with kids in shitty families that find in social media (not Facebook, think prime time Tumblr) a way to scape and find that there are people out there not as shitty as their family. Now they are just completely locked to their shitty family until it’s too late.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      20 days ago

      I think that the chances of a kid from a broken home finding an exploiter online is much more likely than that kid finding a helpful, supportive community.

      • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nzEnglish
        01·
        20 days ago

        Those kids already have exploiters; their parents. The right to communication should be granted to all, and especially the most vulnerable.

        • Dagwood222@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          19 days ago

          They have schools, churches, neighbors, other family, etc etc. There are plenty of organized groups online looking for kids to exploit.

          You’re assuming that they’ll find good people online. If they don’t they’ll end up much worse than when they started.

            • Dagwood222@lemm.eeEnglish
              1·
              19 days ago

              I live in New York City. Old timers here remember when 42nd Street was called ‘the Minnesota Strip.’ It got that name because thousands of young people [some as young as 12] would jump on buses and come to New York to live the dream. They’d be met by pimps who routinely patrolled the bus terminal and quickly gathered up as many as they could.

  • Sixty@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    20 days ago

    Ah fuck. Canada is likely to copycat this, we love copying Australia’s homework. NDP and Cons BOTH already favor this idea except it’s also all 18+ websites. Gov ID to wack off. Puritans are on every wing and I wish we could shake them off.