Social Media Ban for under 16s

just-human on 07/11/2024 - 19:10
Last edited 07/11/2024 - 19:45

The Australian Government is considering implementing a blanket social media ban for under 16s. This would involve using un-tested age verification technology and could expose users of social media platforms to privacy and data breaches.

Link to ABC article.

I think that it should be up to parents to decide when using social media suits their child. It seems ridiculous that we are trying to rush through legislation when we haven't tested the technology to support it. It also seems pretty extreme that we might have to verify our ID to sign up for social media platforms, especially when age verification technology has not been successfully implemented anywhere.

Edit: Here is the list of social media platforms I found on the Guardian article: BeReal, Facebook Messenger, Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, Snapchat, Steam, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, Discord, Signal, Pinterest, WhatsApp and Telegram.

The list could be more but, interestingly, Signal, Whatsapp, and Telegram are on there. These are platforms that use end-to-end encryption that the government will now have linked to your ID if these laws go through.

Do you support the social media ban?

Poll Options expired

  • 800
    Yes, I support it
  • 382
    No, I do not support it
  • 36
    Maybe, I think we should wait for more info
Internet

Comments

    • JimmyF on 08/11/2024 - 08:07
      +6

      So some how a 15yo kid isn't able to navigate the social media landscape, but at 16yo they have all the skills to do that when they have never seen social media before?

      LOL Its not the gov job to raise kids, you had them, you parent them.

    • brendanm on 08/11/2024 - 08:28
      +8

      It's not hard to see what your kids are doing if you aren't lazy. Relying on daddy government to control what your kids watch is the cop out.

      • JimmyF on 08/11/2024 - 09:52
        +1

        Relying on daddy government to control what your kids watch is the cop out.

        I don't know of anyone who has been begging the gov to block social media for under 16yo like they are claiming!

        • just-human on 08/11/2024 - 10:46

          Exactly, if they wanted their kids to not be on social media they would ban the children themselves.

      • ngengerous on 13/11/2024 - 17:40

        I think you're underestimating how devious and incredibly sneaky kids can be. I certainly found ways around the restrictions put in place by my parents at that age, and they did their best to restrict my internet access. If a tech-minded kid wants to access something badly enough, they're going to find a way to do it - regardless of how vigilant the parents might think they are.

        • brendanm on 13/11/2024 - 17:44

          I think you're underestimating how devious and incredibly sneaky kids can be.

          No, I'm not.

          I think you underestimate how useless the government is, or their actual intentions. They will get most people to get a digital ID, but savvy kids will be able to sidestep it, like the government's incredibly effective DNS block to stop piracy.

          • ngengerous on 13/11/2024 - 18:07

            @brendanm:

            It's not hard to see what your kids are doing if you aren't lazy

            I was referring to this point - it definitely is hard to see what your kids are doing regardless of how active or lazy a parent might be.

            I do agree with you about kids sidestepping any restrictions, either from government or parents - if they want social media badly enough they'll still find a way.

            If the ban does go through, what I'll find interesting is how much motivation kids would have left to circumvent the bans. If you're a kid and all your friends are on a platform, and you feel like you're missing out thanks to your parents healthily restricting your internet access, you'll find a way around - but if only a handful of kids you know are dodging the bans, it suddenly becomes much less interesting.

            In much the same way, I was strongly motivated as a kid to find ways to torrent… Linux ISOs as the variety and reward for persevering was so great. If I knew that jumping onto a torrent search engine would only find me downloads for Space Pinball and a 144p rip of Shrek 2, I don't think I would have spent nearly as much time circumventing restrictions.

  • meowbert on 07/11/2024 - 22:12
    +5

    Banning is stupid because it's impossible to enforce.

  • iridiumstem on 07/11/2024 - 22:20
    +8

    Because banning something has always worked in the past.

    Kids will find a way to circumvent it if they want to. If anything, I bet it would make it more difficult for parents to track their children's usage.

    • Protractor on 07/11/2024 - 23:50
      -3

      Some kids. The **really* smart ones (with smart = intelligent and thoughtful) are ones who won't. They are the genes we need going fwd.
      People whinged about seat-belts back in the 1960's too.

      Was dioxin ever banned?

      • iridiumstem on 08/11/2024 - 00:29
        +1

        I think the problem is, the ones who would likely not engage in social media unsafely would be the ones that I would assume jave better parental supports. Teaching kids how to be safe online needs insight on what's currently going on and more importantly resources (i.e. I think it would be very difficult for parents who are working full time who also has to take care of the household activities, to have enough time and energy to really teach their kids how to be safe online).

        Intelligent and being thoughtful is a by-product of the environment and genes. You can have the best genes in the world, but if your parents beat you up, neglect you or just not give you the environment to spread your wings, you wouldn't be able to grow. How would you be able to develop the space and skills to think things out and through, if you are in survival mode all the time? So in that sense, kids who are vulnerable to negative influences of social media are the ones who would probably engage in the social media in a negative manner.

        Also as with banning social media… I don't think it would work. Kids in general want to be in their social circle. There is a reason why we say humans are social animals, with social interactions almost being considered a need or at the very least, a huge predictor for a lot of health issues. They are not idiots, circumventing bans via VPN, etc etc, those things can easily be done via googling and when there is a will, there is normally a way.

  • PopCounty on 07/11/2024 - 22:21
    +2

    Whether or not this gets implemented, the Social platforms would at least have to think to enforce some security for kids.
    They are just money making powerhouses for now.

  • elgrande on 07/11/2024 - 22:26
    +14

    Not going to lie, I agree with OP that this is just a backwards way to get our identification linked to our online profiles.

    If the headline announcement was that you will need to show your passport to watch youtube, there would be outrage. Because its framed as an under 16 ban, no one cares - but the outcome is the same.

  • iridiumstem on 07/11/2024 - 22:39
    +13

    Just wanted to add, some of the George Orwellian stuff that's been mentioned here has happened back at my home country.

    We have the government frequently blocking pornography websites (Not a tech savvy person, but I heard any websites on their database automatically redirects to http://www.warning.or.kr from ISP side), we have a resident registeration number that has your age attached to it etc (South Korea). South Korea doesn't have a porn industry because the government banned it (only softcore pornography).

    What ended up happening is that people circumvented government's implementation. I think Koreans were one of the biggest consumers of pornography in the world. These type of regulation, only thing it does is, it stops any discussions around it.

    • Charity on 08/11/2024 - 00:55
      +3

      it stops any discussions…

      Bingo. That's the real idea.

    • matthewsmar on 08/11/2024 - 08:50
      +3

      Censorship just produces better criminals. It teaches kids that governments are things to work around

    • n3ck3ntry8bort0rgasm on 08/11/2024 - 16:43

      this is a good comment and a great example thank you for sharing.

      not only might koreans be the biggest consumers of porn, but I heard porn is the most consumed media globally and so whatever happens with porn decides mostly everything else for other media. such as DVD and Bluray, there were other options apparently but porn industry chose DVD and because of it's popularity it became the main format for media.

      • iridiumstem on 09/11/2024 - 23:24
        +1

        The worst part is that I think Korea has a terrible culture around pornography and sex because of the ban. You can try to ban something that people want, it's not going to work.

        There needs to be some form of regulations and protections, but a ban does none of that.

        • n3ck3ntry8bort0rgasm on 09/11/2024 - 23:27

          I mean it must mean maybe that purchasing of porn is pushed into the black market?

          so to access it people may need to deal with the same people as criminal activity, such as drugs for example. so a person who just wanted porn is recommended “this cheap pill that will make watching porn 10x more pleasurable”.

          • iridiumstem on 09/11/2024 - 23:36

            @n3ck3ntry8bort0rgasm: Korea has a really fast internet, so people started pirating. I wouldn't go as far as to go, it created a black market (though I have heard stories of how people used to buy adult films from shops on the road side in 80s and 90s).

            The problem with porn in Korea is that, it created a very distorted view on sex. Having porn banned worsened this significantly.

            It doesn't help that Korea is very conservative, so sex ed is terrible. I personally think they need to bring that market to the light and make it more talked, have better sex ed etc etc.

            • n3ck3ntry8bort0rgasm on 10/11/2024 - 16:28

              @iridiumstem:

              Having porn banned worsened this significantly.

              interesting because I heard in the west porn is actually causing this distorted view of sex. oh sorry I think get it now. because they are pirating and still watching it, it is distorting their view on sex, which for mostly people is conservative.

              I think maybe they banned porn to try to increase declining birth rate. I dunno I am not an expert but maybe that's what the country thought would increase people seeking real partners.

              • iridiumstem on 10/11/2024 - 20:25

                @n3ck3ntry8bort0rgasm: Nah, declining birth rate happened relatively recently (or rather the sudden huge drop that allowed Korea to be worse off than Japan happened in last 10 years? Whereas ban on porn has been around ever since).

                As with pornography and its impact, I think it is more, you are constituting education with products that are designed to be unrealistic. Imagine people learning what sex is from porn, and imagine why that would cause issues. With fast internet in Korea, porn's basically something you can download in blink of an eye.

                If porn weren't banned and are taught in schools so that kids are aware that these are just products that are designed to be sold, I think we'd have less issues. Amount of awful awful misinformation I've heard while I served in the military was shocking, and it was more shocking because I served in a location where most kids were top 1% of their cohort in terms of academic achievements, and were from prestigious universities.

                • n3ck3ntry8bort0rgasm on 10/11/2024 - 21:09

                  @iridiumstem: ok makes sense. so because it’s banned, people just don’t talk about it or discuss it because socially admitting to watching it would be admitting to consuming banned content. but they still bypass and watch it easily with fast internet in secret.

                  • iridiumstem on 10/11/2024 - 21:39

                    @n3ck3ntry8bort0rgasm: Basically that. And because kids don't understand that it is a work of fiction, you end up with bunch of kids who has really distorted views on sex

            • [Deactivated] on 10/11/2024 - 21:56

              @iridiumstem:

              Block-quoteHaving porn banned worsened this significantly.> Block-quote

              Jordan Peterson essentially disagrees, and he is smarter than anyone one OzBargain.

              https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W9a2TtZJaLM

              • iridiumstem on 10/11/2024 - 22:13

                @[Deactivated]: If banning it meant that porn is not circulated or watched, perhaps. I think the bit you are missing from my comments is that, banning porn did not stop from people watching pornography (in fact, South Koreans probably consume most amount of porn compared to other countries).

                • [Deactivated] on 10/11/2024 - 23:12

                  @iridiumstem: I’m sure it likely stopped some, and therefore it wasn’t a complete failure. Every time you fail at something, it teaches you something and you have learnt more for when you try again, and you next attempt it. A.I. is becoming a big thing, plenty of people who aren’t qualified for certain jobs are now cheating and using it to make themselves appear qualified, and the wrong person with less skills is often getting the job as a result, the Government won’t be far behind using this technology to police citizens.

        • mlakmlak on 12/11/2024 - 20:31

          some form of regulations

          content ratings

          and protections

          parents & guardians

          • iridiumstem on 12/11/2024 - 20:46
            +1

            @mlakmlak: I personally disagree with the ban, even outside of the whole debacle about privacy and nanny state (not saying that those don't matter), it would be ineffective, making the whole introduction pointless. I am just going to start with that.

            That said, I do feel like current situation probably do need to change. I do think parents should be given more tools to teach their kids how to be safe online, perhaps more school educations on safety online and more freely and easily accessible resource for parents to use as well (Youtube's really good for that kind of information distribution).

            Content rating doesn't work. Australian version of Saints Row 4, for example, or region locked games like Hatred, you can easily circumvent those with few Google searches.

            Parents and guardians, I don't think they are adequately equipped to really teach their kids how to be safe online. If they just ban them from using social media, please see above about my comments about how banning something is useless.

            Ultimately speaking, what needs to happen is kids need to know what is a safe way to engage with social media. The problem is, I don't think that is a common knowledge for even adults.

  • MikeHuntSchmelz on 07/11/2024 - 22:52
    +5

    And how will this help with the high cost of living and housing crisis? Can we get some laws passed to help with that as well?

    • Protractor on 07/11/2024 - 23:52
      -4

      And zap!, the right wing Trump campaign has lobbed right on cue.
      Which bridge are you living under and when was the last time you ate?

    • Sal in SA on 08/11/2024 - 08:37
      +1

      Inflation is on its way down.. takes time. Throwing more $ into the economy to help cost of living could cause inflation to raise again.
      Looking at good 3-5+ years for a new housing developments to go from nothing to compete - again not going to be fixed overnight.

  • donga100 on 07/11/2024 - 23:50
    +7

    Albo and Dutton are scared about kids being on social media but I'm actually far more scared about old people being on social media.

    • Gervais fanboy on 07/11/2024 - 23:51
      +1

      Albo and Dutton are scared about kids being on social media

      They are not

    • matthewsmar on 08/11/2024 - 09:12
      +2

      Not they are not. They are scared about the enormous number of voters that think government can solve problems like this, which they can't. Trump was elected partly because voters actually believe that the governments control prices of goods and services. If you ask an average voter what they worry about the most, many say the economy but I really doubt they could define what the economy is. I suspect many believe it's the cost of groceries and petrol prices. So governments have to be seen to be doing something about "social media".

    • JimmyF on 08/11/2024 - 09:53
      +1

      So how about we change it so under 16yo and over 55yo are blocked from social media!?

  • [Deactivated] on 08/11/2024 - 00:02
    +12

    Social media is bad, it has not done anything but make the world a worse and angrier place, amplifying and hateful rhetoric. I'd love for it to be banned, but that's just not a possibility and I do not have any trust any of those in power now or in the future to stop at Social media.

    We already see this in the USA with states that having government digital IDs to access porn. Australia had Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison in power, both religious to varying degrees - It's far too likely we would see any digital ID based access extended to bullshit and will just turn into "But I have nothing to hide" and "The leopards won't eat MY face"

    Also, where exactly does 'Social Media' start and end? Is YouTube social media? Is Reddit? Is OZbargain? Are forums? Online games? Steam?

    This is classic "Sounds good in theory" but is utterly stupid and woeful in practice and EVERY SINGLE time these laws end up being completely misused and applied for things outside the original intent. For example the "Fixated persons unit" stalking a media producer, or "drug search" powers being used for dirty cops to feel up kids or meta-data laws, list goes on. It's always the same thing, you give power, it gets completely misused but you will never reign that power back in. If government is using "But won't someone think of the children!!" as justification you should be as skeptical as all hell.

    • JimmyF on 08/11/2024 - 08:11
      +2

      Is YouTube social media?

      Considering it is on the list, yes.

      Also, where exactly does 'Social Media' start and end?

      Anything that people can gather and share ideas online, so OZbargain forums are 100% social media. Every user will have to prove they are older than 16 to post when the gov adds it to the list.

  • Charity on 08/11/2024 - 01:01
    +6

    Plot twist. Someone sinister uses YOUR DIGITAL ID and posts "wrong" ideas and visits "wrong" sites.

    But that couldn't happen, right??

    • just-human on 08/11/2024 - 01:03
      +8

      Yes, this will be a 100% air tight system with absolutely no risk or flaws. I’m sure the Australian Government can be trusted to build technology that has no issues whatsoever (robodebt).

      • matthewsmar on 08/11/2024 - 09:14
        +5

        Government's don't build software. The public service lost all their ICT people years ago. They go to the big four consulting firms and throw billions of dollars to get them to build stuff, which usually doesn't work, and given they don't have any decent ICT advice (and if they do they ignore it), they cannot even tell when they are getting grifted, which they are all… all the time.

  • Devastator0 on 08/11/2024 - 07:22
    +2

    To be honest, this is idiotic imo, especially since it'll no doubt force adults to submit their actual ID's to prove age. Will be a massive data security and privacy mess. Only need to look at the UK and how they require your actual ID to be submitted to create a PSN (Playstation Network) account there. When they submit the ID, it goes off to some 3rd party somewhere else (outside of the country) that does the "verification" (and stores) your ID.

    I would very much not be ok with submitting my ID and personal details if it's going to be shot somewhere overseas and just leaked there and then have my identity stolen. Garbage.

  • Shane043 on 08/11/2024 - 07:26
    +2

    How do they actually plan on policing it though? Many of us were smoking cigarettes in high school, which wasn't legal, but made possible by older acquaintances..

  • Subere on 08/11/2024 - 07:38
    +2

    IRC gonna make a comeback

    • SBOB on 08/11/2024 - 07:41
      +4

      IRC gonna make a comeback

      IRC users
      "Don't call if a comeback, I've been here for years"

    • churningNburning on 08/11/2024 - 17:52

      Austnet resurgence!

  • MrThing on 08/11/2024 - 08:12

    social media is a mental health scourge, its done nothing to benefit society, just accelerated hate, division, false narratives, conspiracy theories, etc

    Its a shame parents don't parent these days and the government feels it necessary to take control

  • DingoBilly on 08/11/2024 - 08:42

    I think social media sucks in general - should just be banned outright. Causing a lot of issues for a lot of people, not sure what it actually gives as a benefit.

    It'll be relatively easy to circumvent - but at least it'll stop some kids from getting smashed on there so net win.

  • matthewsmar on 08/11/2024 - 08:45
    +5

    It won't work (Software engineer here). The government will hire some hopeless software dev house to implement this and some kid will figure out how to circumvent it. Also, it requires handing over highly sensitive Ids which people are going to object too. This is just another example of how totally out of touch governments are WRT tech. Also, it's just an election promise to woo parents anyway. This probably needs to be done at an OS level and both Apple and MS have this good controls available for business, which they could easily migrate for standard personal users

    • Minimum chips on 08/11/2024 - 09:55
      +4

      Not to disagree with any of that, but an often overlooked point is how bad kids these days are with computers.

      They can use apps and do some basic tasks, but the vast majority have idea how to do anything more.

      Because they use iPads and phones first, and it generally all works fine, the touchscreen GUI is all they know. They've never had to solve a BSOD issue, edit the registry, meddle with program files or download a keygen while avoiding viruses. When they do have a problem, they google it and follow some step by step instructions but if it's too hard they give up and they don't actually understand what they're doing.

      As always, there are some kids that are really into computing, but the rest of them won't be able to circumvent a ban until the nerdy kids share the secret.

      The real effect of this ban might just be a nerd gets a high five and a jock named Connor learns how to install a program.

      • Subere on 08/11/2024 - 11:24
        +1

        So everything you just described are the parents now. We are all that gen from the 80s-00s that have had PCs and the net from the beginning.

        The "mums and dads" rhetoric worked in the 90s with OUR parents because they were tech clueless (now they're the grandparents).

        They keep painting this picture of clueless parents when we built the friggen platforms 😂

  • Nebargains on 08/11/2024 - 09:22
    +10

    The fact that support for this is currently way out in front on this tiny poll on Ozbargain concerns me. Since when should parents simply defer their parenting abilities to the government? YouTube? Steam? Really, whats next, video games?

    Every parent should be able to make the decision that is best for their children, not the government.

    I have no idea how this could realistically be enforced. Stuff like this and the Mis/Disinformation bill (which conveniently doesnt apply to legacy media and the government) is the reason why right wing characters like Trump are able to get up and win elections. We have bigger problems then censorship.

    • Dionysus on 08/11/2024 - 09:33

      It's not deferring, social media is like a drug and studies have shown this so if the gov is looking at it in that way then why not ban it??
      I think of a ban as it assisting parents more than doing the job for them.

      • brendanm on 08/11/2024 - 11:45
        +2

        It's parents responsibility to do the parenting.

  • Dionysus on 08/11/2024 - 09:26
    +2

    @just-human I'm curious whether you have children around that age? Reason why I ask is I have seen what kids are posting and what others are viewing and it is simply not healthy..
    Privacy aside the question is simple, would these kids be better off without it? Yes
    Would society benefit as the kids grow and become adults? Probably
    Will they find a way around it? Yes but it will also help parents have the discussion with kids that its not healthy.

    If you take a step back and put social media in a category with other similar things that can cause depression, anxiety, addiction, brain development etc etc then you could also argue how it should immediately be banned.
    Just because on face value it seems safe the reality is it's doing much more harm than good.

    • JimmyF on 08/11/2024 - 10:00
      +3

      I have seen what kids are posting and what others are viewing and it is simply not healthy..

      Agreed, so teach your kids to be better, don't block them until they hit 16yo. The internet and social media isn't going away. Your kids will be exposed at some point. So give them the skills to handle it now while they are more likely to listen to you.

      I steer my under 16yo kids away from the Tiktok crap etc. They have messenger, don't do Facebook as they have no interest in it. They wanted Snapchat as the cool kids have it, but its a cesspool, so they gave that away on their own.

      They would rather talk to their friends, play games online or watch YouTube.

      Its not the gov job to say what my kids can do.

      • just-human on 08/11/2024 - 10:36
        +1

        Your kids will be exposed at some point. So give them the skills to handle it now while they are more likely to listen to you.

        Exactly, rather than give them fear, actually try to help them. That way if something goes wrong they know what to do or trust you enough to go to you.

    • just-human on 08/11/2024 - 10:33

      I'm curious whether you have children around that age?

      I do not have any children but I do have a sibling around that age. I’m also online a lot so yes I 100% do see the impact as I’m not exactly that old lol. I also agree it’s not healthy but there needs to be some level of individual accountability. I was on social media when I was around 13 and it helped me learn things and that includes looking out for scams or online safety and I’m grateful my parents exposed me to technology early because it’s what helped build my passion and define my study choices I made for university very recently.

      Privacy aside the question is simple, would these kids be better off without it?

      Maybe, but seeing the negative and positives, I think it should be up the parent to decide whats best for their child, not to block a potentially good thing for everyone.

      To be honest though my issue isn’t really not letting children use social media. It’s the way they’re going about it. At the end of the day this is an ineffective strategy that has big implications for our privacy. If they want to ban social media they can think of a way to do it that doesn’t invade our privacy so much and then I could support it.

    • brendanm on 08/11/2024 - 11:45

      Reason why I ask is I have seen what kids are posting and what others are viewing and it is simply not healthy..

      Then don't have your kids looking at it?

  • jugsy on 08/11/2024 - 09:49
    +16

    Wild that so many support this. It's just going to be an expensive arms race, kids will move platforms at the drop of a hat, and workarounds will be rife.

    • Subere on 08/11/2024 - 11:26
      +7

      Not only that. Many don't realise that adults will have to prove they're over 16 to access…what, Steam? YouTube? Wtf

      Hand over your ID to zuck and musk freely.

      "Nothing to hide" rhetoric incoming….

      • jugsy on 08/11/2024 - 11:39
        +2

        Adults should really be able to think through this logic, all that lead and microplastics taking a heavy toll

  • Minimum chips on 08/11/2024 - 10:00
    -7

    Well, two pages of comments and nobody has mentioned pedophiles yet. The internet is a pretty (profanity) up place for kids, and anything that tries to keep them away from the genuinely huge number of predators from all over the world who are trying to get in touch with Aussie kids is probably worth a try. Obviously Facebook et al have failed consistently in that regard.

    • JimmyF on 08/11/2024 - 10:03
      +6

      LOL Sure the internet is farked up, just look at this site for example its a cesspool on a good day. But this law isn't blocking kids from the internet. Its blocking them from the major social sites, so all that will happen is they'll move to less mainstream platforms, which I would say are more dangerous to kids.

      Anyone who thinks kids will go, "Oh the gov said I can't be on social media now, so I'll go outside and play ball" is kidding themselves!

    • just-human on 08/11/2024 - 10:38
      +2

      Just because that’s an issue it doesn’t mean we should give up all our individual freedoms to stop it. The way you stop it is by educating rather than starting an arms race. You can stop it by making sure parents and children and equipped with the tools to handle it rather than simply saying “that’s illegal” not solving the issue.

      All this will do is prevent children from reaching out for help because they may fear consequences.

      • MessyG on 09/11/2024 - 19:11

        I wish that were true but like communism, sounds great in theory but in practice it's a dumpster fire. There are parents out there who simply don't care. They love that their kids have social media because it babysits them. They literally do not give a shite what their kids do on it. It is a level of neglect that is getting worse.

    • iridiumstem on 08/11/2024 - 14:00

      I think that was kinda implied when people talk about social media and how it is unsafe.

      Nothing will be more effective than parents who have time and space to teach and support their children to be safe online. Perhaps second best would be, schools doing that (and they can co occur imo).

      I was unfortunate and fortunate enough to stop something like that happening. I was part of an online hobby group that had kids in high school to adults in 40s. Someone had intentions to groom a high schooler, and meet them in person. Since they were on a platform similar to Discord, this was happening in the background.

      The thing that stopped the kid from seeing this person was an adult (me), having a chat with her. I, metaphorically, sat with her and had the conversation at her level. Given that I am few thousands of kms away, I think that was the best I could do as an adult.

      I didn't give her the condescending, you shouldn't do this speech, rather gave her a question for her to think about, it ultimately is your choice, but I do think it sounds very unsafe, do you think it would be safe for you to meet this guy in person?

      Last time I had a chat with her, she was reaching out to those helplines and supports. Frankly speaking, i say it was a failure of parents and school to teach how to be safe online (and more importantly a significant failure that the kid didn't have anyone to raise these to before it became hit too close to something heinous) .

      Kids will always find a way to circumvent whatever you want to implement. Banning it will only stop that converation that all parents should have with their kids.

  • RiseAndRuin on 08/11/2024 - 10:01
    +3

    I see this government finally sorted out their priorities and Albo is fixing the important stuff, like cost of livi… oh wait…

    • brendanm on 08/11/2024 - 11:48
      +6

      Oops, you've been critical of the government. Your username is linked to your myGov digital online id, police will be around shortly to take you to reeducation camp. It's for the greater good.

      • RiseAndRuin on 08/11/2024 - 12:46

        I was expecting that, so I already broke into my neighbour's home with a machete, to make sure the police will let me go free.

      • MessyG on 09/11/2024 - 09:52
        +1

        Yeh the government is going to imprison you for opinions on Ozbargain. We're not that important mate. It's like the stupid covid conspiracy where the government was supposedly injecting us with RFID to track us. Track us where? Around Kmart? FFS.

        • brendanm on 09/11/2024 - 09:55

          I didn't realise I even mentioned ozbargain.

          RFID is not only too large to inject, it also can't be used for tracking.

          You might want to ask the ABC reporters who were raided by police how they feel about this. Same with friendlyjordies. Pauline hanson has just been dragged through court over a social media comment

          • MessyG on 09/11/2024 - 10:18
            +1

            @brendanm: You didn't need to. You're posting on Ozbargain.

            I don't disagree with you re certain organised-crime adjacent parties going after people who get too close to the truth - but they didn't need an online ID to figure out who was behind it all. Our kids are being exposed to and re-enacting the shit they see online and their shitty parents don't care. I don't know what the answer is but it can't be nothing.

            • brendanm on 09/11/2024 - 12:04
              -1

              @MessyG:

              You didn't need to. You're posting on Ozbargain.

              Try reading the topic of the post again.

              Our kids are being exposed to and re-enacting the shit they see online and their shitty parents don't care.

              Then police parents better.

              I don't know what the answer is but it can't be nothing.

              There is an answer, it's called parenting, not endless overreach from government.

              • MessyG on 09/11/2024 - 19:12

                @brendanm: Policing parents better IS legislating.

                • brendanm on 09/11/2024 - 19:37

                  @MessyG: Perhaps they need parenting licences, like people need to get to keep lizards. I don't need to hand over my ID to even more dodgy organisations because you can't stop your kids going on Instagram.

  • Alley Cat on 08/11/2024 - 10:15

    It’s silly to think there won’t be something new to replace it. Take away the substance without actually addressing the addiction is a great recipe for disaster.

    Here’s what happens in youth shelters: kids go in, get the support and training they need, straighten up their lives and almost grow into regular adults. They then leave the nest, only to find housing to be impossibly expensive, guess what happens? They revert back.

    This is give a man a fish and feed him for a day on a massive scale.

  • welcomeUniverseWorld on 08/11/2024 - 10:38

    Completely support it.

  • afah0447 on 08/11/2024 - 10:40

    Classic case of government being seen to do something to quell the outrage from those clutching their pearls in society. It will be near impossible to enforce and end up costing tens of millions.

  • wannagrababargain on 08/11/2024 - 10:43

    Steam..lol

  • Windows98 on 08/11/2024 - 10:46
    +1

    The parents are the ones that are addicted to the same sites. How are they going to enforce limits on their kids?

    I'm fine and would love verification of everyone using social media. Even make people use their real names.
    People should have real life consequences for their online comments, just like they would if they said them in person. No more online trolls and bots trying to influence everyone.

  • datscheap on 08/11/2024 - 11:02
    +2

    I support the idea but dont believe it will work.
    My kids and their mates having multiple burner gmail addresses and know how to use a VPN better then a middle aged Ozbargainer getting cheap Youtube premium.

    • SlickMick on 09/11/2024 - 16:34

      They haven't started looking at solutions yet… the only one I've seen mentioned is face id. It wouldn't surprise me if they can predict age sufficiently for the purpose.

      … but then again it also wouldn't surprise me if this is just a brain fart from albo and hasn't been thought through at all.

  • SnowDragon on 08/11/2024 - 11:18

    Social media in general should be restricted to people capable of rubbing at least two braincells together.

    • Windows98 on 08/11/2024 - 11:26
      +2

      So. No one?

      • SnowDragon on 08/11/2024 - 11:30
        +1

        The world would be a better place without unmoderated comments from armchair experts.

  • trevor99 on 08/11/2024 - 11:23
    +6

    To prove your age you'll need a Digital ID. Ahha!! This will later lead to digital Currency.

    Then everything you ever buy will be monitored and restricted if they decide. For example Too much meat, too much petrol, too much travel. Your phone will go red and refuse. Social credit system as is already in place in China.
    Think.

    • Windows98 on 08/11/2024 - 11:27
      -5

      Sounds good to me tbh. Humans are idiots and need to be parented constantly.

  • Drakesy on 08/11/2024 - 11:58
    +1

    Lets be honest though, if there's anything that kids can do better than the people making the laws to protect them is understand technology.

  • miicah on 08/11/2024 - 13:09
    +4

    Oh yeah just want I want, my children to hand over 100 points of ID to foreign tech companies.

    Or even worse, hand that ID over to a half-baked Australian government digital ID implementation.

    • Eeples on 08/11/2024 - 23:13
      +1

      Your under 16yo children won’t be handing over anything. They will be banned.

  • Miami Mall Alien on 08/11/2024 - 14:04
    +7

    ITT: your average, coddled, placated, middle-class Australians with room-temp IQs and zero awareness of last century's history cheering on their own demise and enslavement. What's new.

    In other news, water is wet.

    Australia sometimes feels like it's the final destination of the soul of every naive, gullible braindead fool from history that ended up trading their life and liberty for some temporary security/safety. The kind of people who cheered on the French or Bolshevik revolutions before they wound up guillotining/shooting them and their families, the average Germans who willingly seig-heiled with their beloved "National Socialists" all the way to national ruination/suicide or the people who willingly marched into a "delousing" shower in a concentration camp thinking they'd be fine, and somehow the victims of every major tyrannical/genocidal government throughout history ended up reincarnating into the bodies of Australians born between 1960 to now, so they could end up reliving the torment they had endured in their past lives again.

    This place truly manifests its prison colony past over and over again with this kind of spiritual and psychological imprisonment that people here cannot for the life of themselves overcome. Slaves who love their slavery; it's the stuff that megalomaniacal psychopathic wet dreams are made of, that every tyrant from Caesar to Mao fantasized about.

  • Dose Pipe Sutututu on 08/11/2024 - 14:34

    Before I had kids, couldn't have cared less. Now I have kids, 100% ban the thing for non-adults.

    • SlickMick on 09/11/2024 - 16:42
      +1

      It's a start. We want to protect our children from other harmful things until they have sufficient maturity to proect themselves.

      I hope there is a next step for adults incapable or distinguishing facts from garbage.
      I am so sick of having to fact-check what people tell me.

  • iminabrons on 08/11/2024 - 14:34
    -1

    The best and probably only way to "control" apps that kids love using is to ban all forms of advertising on those apps.

  • gakko on 08/11/2024 - 14:58

    (profanity) all social media. I support this ban and don't care how loopdiloop the enforcement is.

    • just-human on 08/11/2024 - 15:01
      +1

      So you’re willing to give up your privacy for a law that does little to achieve it’s target?

      • gakko on 08/11/2024 - 16:54
        +1

        People's identities should be tied to their social media accounts yes.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join