The Under 16 Social Media Ban

[wayneL]

If you're 15years and 364days, you can't view a Wombles video on YouTube, but you can go on Pornhub.

This is so ******* ridiculous!

 

[farmerge]

If you're 15years and 364days, you can't view a Wombles video on YouTube, but you can go on Pornhub.

This is so ******* ridiculous!

unbelieveable

 

[wayneL]

Well they've cornholed this abomination of a bill through late last night.

Next up, social credit score.

 

[sptrawler]

It all sounds like politicians doing a King Canute, it didn't work for him, I doubt it will for them.

Where I grew up in Kalgoorlie, there were many parents sent their kids to private schools so they wouldn't be exposed to the uncultured dirty unwashed, well that didn't work either.

 

[wayneL]

One of our very few politicians that has integrity.

 

[sptrawler]

One of our very few politicians that has integrity.

I don't know how it will backfire , but I'm sure it will backfire.

 

[wayneL]

I don't know how it will backfire , but I'm sure it will backfire.

Kids just figure out a workaround.

 

[farmerge]

One of our very few politicians that has integrity.

What's happened to the Organ Grinder.
It would appear that only Monkeys and Idiots occupy those comfy seats in Parliament at present.

 

[moXJO]

Well they've cornholed this abomination of a bill through late last night.

Next up, social credit score.

Big authoritarian move. Rushing it in like a bunch of grubs

 

[sptrawler]

Kids just figure out a workaround.

I have a grandson, that has been busted twice for hacking the schools computer. Lol
The kids will make it a game, to beat the block.

 

[farmerge]

I have a grandson, that has been busted twice for hacking the schools computer. Lol
The kids will make it a game, to beat the block.

@sptrawler smarter than the average dodo come dud

 

[Craton]

FWIW.
Back in the mid 90's was when I first got online on that wonderful Dialup internet (I can still hear that modem connecting sound), one didn't have to be a genius but I predicted this would come, that the govt. will have to act because from my perspective, the govts. of the day were to slow to act.
Or perhaps they didn't even realise the potential danger and ominous warnings like viruses, hackers and threat actors from all corners of the world, that the online realm posed.

To me this ban aka age restriction is akin to the age restriction on alcohol and cigarettes, oh, same as driving and voting. Do I think it's a good thing?
Yes. I've seen first hand how easy it is for our youth (namely my number one daughter) to become addicted and then horrified by "events" online.
As any good parent, both my wife and myself were very mindful in keeping an eye to what our kids were doing online. We educated them to the potential grooming and scams that were and are still prevelant in the online space.
Number daughter soon realised something wasn't right when she was asked at the fragile age of 12, for a nude pic from someone she thought was a friend. To her credit she imposed a self ban for about 2 or 3 weeks and would even look at our one and only shared PC.

Now of course, the issue has grown to the point where everyone MUST have a smart phone/device of some sort. For parents this must be a real headache and cause much concerned. Especially as kids tend to retreat into there own rooms thus have little or no supervision.

Yes, the kids will find ways of circumventing any "block" just like a lot of us did back in our youth, e.g., obtaining booze or smokes or drugs or insert your choices of naughty things here...

How will this restriction be implemented?
From the SMH and reads in part:

Tech platforms will be required by law to take reasonable steps to ensure children under 16 are not using their services. Currently, many platforms self-regulate to prevent users under 13, with many merely asking users to type in their age. Others, like Meta, have more complex systems in place to detect age.

The eSafety commissioner will be in charge of determining what these reasonable steps are, and will issue regulatory guidance about how to take them.

The government has not said exactly what methods the eSafety commissioner will recommend, but it has previously put forward a “double-blind, tokenised approach”, whereby information would be provided to a verifying third party that would certify the user’s age to social media platforms without revealing details about the child. This could involve all Australians being made to supply IDs or biometric data to prove their age. The government is currently undertaking trials on the technology.

Some tech giants, including Meta, have argued that the app stores run by Apple and Google should be made to hand user ages over to social platforms, since they already collect them.

Is there a hidden agenda and is this just the wedge to open up a whole raft of "Orwellian" scenarios?
One would certainly and indeed expect not however, we must remain ever vigilant.

So yep and I may be naive but I do think the govt. is acting in good faith, is looking out for both parents and our future generations. Also in part, reigning in the power of the big tech giants.

 

[Smurf1976]

Is there a hidden agenda and is this just the wedge to open up a whole raft of "Orwellian" scenarios?

I think the issue is regardless of the intentions, there's a concern the outcome in practice ends up being bad.

The Australian Government doesn't exactly have a great record with technical things after all and once it's stuffed, they never manage to fix it. Hence the cynicism.