• DrunkenPirate@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Lawyer sues tech company

      But we asked for the birthday

      Lawyer points to law text

      Company fined

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        14 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.

        • General_Effort@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          14 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.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            14 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.

          • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            13 days ago

            Trusting your face to Facebook is just as terrifying, thanks.

            (Plus I have concerns as someone who still looks teenage in her 20s)

        • JeremyHuntQW12@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 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.

          • copd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            14 days ago

            How can it possibly be legal to 3D face scan a child, especially if it needs to be authenticated by a remote server somewhere.

            I can only ever see option 1 working

        • Wooki@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          A large part of this will help maintain liability for harm to young people. How ages is verified is irrelevant

        • Clanket@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          Problematic for who, the tech companies? They’re practically printing money. Let them spend it on actual solutions to issues that are causing problems for the World.

          • Grimy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            14 days ago

            It forces them to implement solutions that make having anonymous accounts impossible.

          • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            14 days ago

            Problematic for the children who are having their rights taken away. This change bans children from connecting with their friends in other countries, other states, and even other cities.

            Even something as simple as hopping in a voice call with your squad to play Deep Rock Galactic is now illegal for 15 year olds. That’s ridiculous. The fact that they can break the law is great, but they shouldn’t have to break the law in order to do something so harmless.

            What about using Zoom to speak to a doctor or therapist? What about contacting queer support resources through social media? What about using a text based suicide hotline? According to the law, that’s social media.

      • taladar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        14 days ago

        It would take too long.

        Making the bet that is, it would be leaked before you are done setting up the betting system.

      • A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        14 days ago

        Australia requires mobile phone providers to verify IDs before providing cell phone service. As a result, in September 2022, Optus leaked the records of 10 million Australians including passport and drivers license details.

        So negative 2 years, 2 months.

        But this is just asking for more.

    • FuryMaker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Identification would need to be handled by a 3rd party to even remotely work. Then they pass on the “yes they’re over 16” tick to the social media platform, with no actual identity details.

      Edit: and likewise, Identity company have no details about the social media account name or anything. Just a token transfer of sorts.

      • JeremyHuntQW12@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 days ago

        Identification would need to be handled by a 3rd party to even remotely work. Then they pass on the “yes they’re over 16” tick to the social media platform, with no actual identity details.

        The legislatiion specifically allows SM sites to handle ID.

    • kurikai@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Tech company’s probably already have enough info to know a person age without requiring an id. They could even use ai for something actually useful

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 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.

            • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 days ago

              This kind of control tend to be ip based, like cookies in the eu. So if they don’t know they won’t know. And if they know means that they knew. Nothing changes on that regard.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                13 days ago

                That depends on the law. For example, it’s possible that the US could require Meta to verify ages regardless of nationality, so you the EU (for example) would be subject to it.

                I’m not saying that’s how any of these laws work, I’m merely saying that it’s possible. If enough people sidestep the law by using a VPN, I could countries use a heavier hand (e.g. verify everyone or don’t do business here).

                I will always oppose these types of laws. I set up my WiFi to connect over a VPN to the next state over because my state has ID laws for porn and social media. It’s annoying and increases latency a bit (only like 10ms), so I’ll oppose them even if I can sidestep them.

  • MimicJar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    14 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.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        14 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.

    • essteeyou@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      14 days ago

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

      I doubt it, and if they do, they’ll classify a whole bunch of nonsense as educational content in order to do so, e.g. religious content as science.

      • MimicJar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 days ago

        I mean YouTube has educational content, but that is far from its primary purpose. Assuming YouTube is completely unrestricted it wouldn’t be hard for Facebook to add enough content to be arguably educational.

        Hell plenty of people use TikTok for educational reasons. I’m not saying it’s right, but you could argue TikTok is educational in the same way you can argue YouTube is educational.

        Now if YouTube is forced to classify it’s educational content the same way they classify children’s content (aka poorly), maybe that’ll work.

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 days ago

      People should lie about as much as possible to most companies they interact with online anyway (obviously don’t lie to your bank, or doctor, or whatever). Do always, without fail, lie randomly about your age, gender, address (if it’s not relevant) or anything else that’s not actually needed to provide the service.

    • JeremyHuntQW12@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

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

      No, it merely requires the sites to provide an alternative, such as face scanning using a mobile phone unlock. Using a computer ? Then you’ll have hand over your ID.

      The law also explicitly gives sites the right to onsell private information if its outlined in the terms of agrrement.

      • MimicJar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 days ago

        Re verification per AP,

        The amendments passed on Friday bolster privacy protections. Platforms would not be allowed to compel users to provide government-issued identity documents including passports or driver’s licenses, nor could they demand digital identification through a government system.

        So it sounds like an ID will not be a requirement.

        I suppose a face scan is possible, but I find it unlikely. Obviously if it heads in that direction then the law should be amended to clarify that is also not acceptable.

        In terms of selling information I assume that just clarifies the status quo and isn’t new. Not that that makes it acceptable, it just means that’s something to tackle.

  • VerticaGG@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    Is anyone talking about the fact that it’s the predatory, short-term-quarterly-gains oriented behavior of the platforms themselves which is in fact rampaging though democracies, massively affecting and survielling Adult’s behaviors on a loop of ragebait-induced dopamine/seratonin manipulation?

    Because Kids are going to connect with one another, on whichever the next platform is that’s not banned. What’s more, the institutions they attend will inevitably ask them to do so as…things like Youtube arent exactly 100% avoidable.

    Pretty pathetic to clamp down on Youth Liberty in a society that has basically none, when centrally-hosted platforms owned by corporate behemoths are all-but-physically trampling the landscape like some kind of fucked up gentrification-glorifying-voiceline-repeating Megazord

    • derpgon@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      It is easier to enforce access than to enforce ethical algorithm. Sadly, it is not perfect, but it is better than allowing it.

      • VerticaGG@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 days ago

        Well we agree but it’s only as much better as it is effective…because when it’s not it’s giving the impression of doing something while in reality it’s legitimizing the stripping of the autonomy.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      14 days ago

      That would require us paying one parent enough to cover the other parent being a child care expert. But nobody gets to profit off of that so fuck society, everybody works, and nobody gets community goods except the wealthy.

        • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 days ago

          if social media is fediverse, you’re right; if social media is agents of surveillance capitalism, fuck social media

          what’s “social” about what most people call social media?

          • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            14 days ago

            Governmemts doesn’t care, any platform that empowers civillians to communicate with each other is “social media”. Governments love to control and restrict communications.

            Lemmy would be considered social media. Eventually they would be requiring social media to verify IDs. So Lemmy instances will be required to verify IDs or be banned from certain countries.

            • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              14 days ago

              even YouTube got in an exception list. So it’s not an “all or nothing” approach, it seems.

              • Lemmy is too small for governments to care
              • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                14 days ago

                Youtube got an exeption because Alphabet Inc. lobbied them to do so to get kids used to Youtube. Lemmy does not have the lobbying power like a mega corporation, plus, its a good excuse to get rid of a left-leaning platform, since governments tend to be against the left.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          14 days ago

          but but that requires actually effort and budget that we’d have to take away from Australian oligarchs!