I know - you’re very probably already sixteen. That’s why we are here.

If you’ve managed to miss the coming change in the law, I envy you. This silly law has taken up several hours of my year that could have been spent doing something more productive like watching Golden Girls.

But, the law is here now and we need to take “Reasonable Steps” to ensure that everyone is over sixteen. If you are wondering what “reasonable steps” is, then join the club. Nobody really knows. What I do know is that we have to start to make an effort to be sure that no young’uns are here against the law.

To that end, we have hired a helpful bot called Molly. She’s an expert at being sixteen and she’s just been told that it’s her job is to verify all your ages. Here she is:

What’s next? Well, in the first phase we ask that you drop her a Message that verifies you are over 16. She doesn’t want to see your government ID. Some ideas that she would accept are:

  1. A passenger takes a photo of your username on a sheet of paper with you driving (please don’t make this one a selfie). Faces not required.
  2. A photo of your username with a glass of alcohol at a bar.
  3. A convincing spiel that would only come from someone older than sixteen (Can you tell Molly who Samantha is?). Can you tell her about the Breakfast Club that only 70’s/80’s kids from Queensland would know?
  4. Anything else you can think of that only someone over sixteen could/would do.

There’s no need to spend a lot of time on this. At this point, I’ll go through the users who have messaged her and compile a list of people who have verified their age. You can be creative. Just be aware that there’s an infinitesimal chance (but not zero) that whatever you send may be sent to some government agency to demonstrate that we are complying with the law.

Frequently Asked Questions:

  1. How do you know that the user isn’t faking their submission? I don’t. No method is perfect, we saw kids defeating intricate and expensive verification systems earlier this year. Kids are smart.
  2. How do you stop a kid from moving their account to one of the thousands of non-Australian Lemmy Instances and just continuing on with their day? I can’t. The fact that the law is totally ineffectual in the context of Lemmy is beside the point. We clearly meet the definition of a Social Media platform according to the law, and we are based in Australia. So we have to comply, even if it is pointless.
  3. Are you aware that this is pointless and kids are going to get around it? I know that teenage-me sure would have. But again, that’s beside the point. We need to comply with the law.
  4. Will you accept a photo of me in my undies? Ok, this one isn’t frequent from previous discussions on the law, but I wanted to include it in case. Please don’t send NSFW photos to show you are over age.
  • melbaboutown@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    13 days ago

    I might, it’s just a hassle. I can’t be stuffed.

    And I find it kinda plausible. Maybe it wasn’t the main driver, that’s the Australian government having a knee jerk response to look like they’re solving a complex problem. But for lucrative data brokers it is very very convenient.

    It would have perhaps been better to give under 16s dumb phones and have a family computer room, or just talk to your damn kid about what they’re doing and seeing online. But that doesn’t dump highly sensitive info out to create advertising profiles and sell.

    • Skavau@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      Hi, Brit here.

      I’m confused. I thought the rules from Australia here only applied to specific platforms rather than anywhere. I read somewhere about specific platforms being considered exempt. The likelihood to me that the Australian government (or your Ofcom equivalent) even know about the Fediverse to me seems slim.

      • melbaboutown@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        They seem to for now?

        From what I can tell these relaxed measures for Aussie Zone are pre-emptive, to establish that ‘reasonable steps’ were taken and hopefully avoid being pressured to demand more intrusive verification in future.

        However that doesn’t mean things won’t change. Afaik Dreamwidth and 4chan are litigating to not have to comply. And more sites could be brought in during the second wave.

        I see the UK government has noticed Bsky (part of the fediverse) and demanded verification there so it’s possible ours might learn what it is as well.

        Creepily the UK also seem to be making tentative noises about VPNs now.

        • Skavau@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 days ago

          However that doesn’t mean things won’t change. Afaik Dreamwidth and 4chan are litigating to not have to comply. And more sites could be brought in during the second wave.

          What could Australia possibly do, other than geoblocking 4chan, if they don’t comply exactly?

          I see the UK government has noticed Bsky (part of the fediverse) and demanded verification there so it’s possible ours might learn what it is as well.

          Bluesky is much larger than the Fediverse here to be fair. It’s not the same. Moreover, they’d have to individually investigate hundreds of instances as they are all independently run.

          Creepily the UK also seem to be making tentative noises about VPNs now.

          Eh, nothing concrete. What are you referring to?

          • melbaboutown@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            They could probably just geoblock 4chan I guess? Maybe? Or try to? I don’t know what the government think they’re going to do. But Mississippi residents did get geoblocked from Bsky.

            I hope you’re right and we just keep flying under the radar. Especially as they’d probably try to use AI for the workload of hundreds of instances, with not great outcomes.

            Yeah, nothing concrete. And they claimed to have nothing concrete in mind. But they’re definitely thinking about it, I’ll see if I can find the article again

            Edit: Ok, so they ‘have no plan to ban VPNs’, but ‘are looking very closely into their usage’. I have no idea what that means.

            https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/could-vpns-be-banned-uk-government-to-look-very-closely-into-their-usage-amid-mass-usage-since-the-age-verification-row

            • Skavau@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 days ago

              They could probably just geoblock 4chan I guess? Maybe? Or try to? I don’t know what the government think they’re going to do. But Mississippi residents did get geoblocked from Bsky.

              Well yeah, literally all they could do is geoblock 4chan.

              Edit: Ok, so they ‘have no plan to ban VPNs’, but ‘are looking very closely into their usage’. I have no idea what that means.

              I am a Brit.

              Absolutely nothing lol.