• surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I feel like every law I see coming out of Australia is just telling their citizens they’re not allowed to do something else mundane. All while the government services get worse, and the corrupt become more entrenched.

    What a shithole.

    • auzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Like what?

      Often the things that seem mundane actually aren’t

      Like vaping is just tobacco 2.0… and we don’t need everyone to have easy access to guns (especially not kids). Networks like Facebook are so unmoderated at the moment they should be held to account.

      Asbestos and engineered stone? Enough said

      And that’s mainly everything I can think of that’s banned that I can think of…

      • GHiLA@sh.itjust.worksBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Like vaping is just tobacco 2.0

        What is this, govern me like a strict old nan?

        Is dancing allowed down there as well or is it a gateway to thievery or something?


        Oh, I forgot, Lemmy is only lefty and free when they aren’t being told what to boycott by someone else. I guess we do have something in common with Trump voters.

        Nooo, imposing our will on the public is ok under some circumstances!

        FUCKING SHEEP

        My life. My way. Fuck a government telling me what to do.

        I guess I am the crazy one. It’s just human nature to want to be controlled and be told what to do. Viva authoritarianism. Dom me harder, Donny.

          • GHiLA@sh.itjust.worksBanned
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            No part of my argument had anything to do with safety or health.

            A person’s autonomy is their business. Leave them well alone. Their life, their path.

            Or I guess alcohol doesn’t have a purpose then, and we can get rid of it too?

            • Squizzy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              The fact is it impacts everyone else, the public services will have to deal with the fall out.

            • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              Everyone is really concerned, GHiLA. We think you might have an addiction. But we’re here to help. Please remember the bans are only for under 18s. You have to remember. Look at your wife, she’s dying of… asphyxiation or something. Because you keep hotboxing the bedroom.

              • GHiLA@sh.itjust.worksBanned
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                Oh I’ve got like three at least, that I know about.

                You guys are one of them.

                uwu

        • auzy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Vaping companies like Vape4life were writing petitions on Facebook arguing that Vaping was great to help smokers stop smoking.

          Meanwhile, the same dodgy companies were selling vapes to 10 year olds online (they had NOTHING in place to stop underage people buying them). What possible health use could underage people have for vapes?

          Meanwhile, every vaping fuckwit around was smoking vapes illegally on trains and in heavily populated public areas. And every asshole (including my ex housemate) was vaping inside (I literally told her not to. I want to do high altitude mountaineering in the future so I need my lungs. And she was getting super cheap rent). When you tell them to do it outside, they always say “vaping is just water, it’s perfectly safe”.

          If you want to “eat the rich”, you should be telling Smoking companies to fuck off. They’re lying to their userbase, whilst their exec’s become wealthy millionaires. And when their clients get cancer (or the people around them get cancer), they run down the clock on the lawsuit so they don’t lose any money.

          Fuck Tabacco and cigarette companies.

          • auzy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Also, I had some absolute wanker the other day throw a lit cigerette on my nature strip (I was amazed, and I was sitting in the car), on a hot day. I’m lucky I saw him do it and he didn’t start a grass fire (and yet, if one was started, he’d be responsible, not the tobacco company). Everyone in cigarette companies knows this happens and could provide a way to extinguish them in the box, but instead, they know people are chucking them on the ground

            i have attached the photo of the guy (if anyone in Victoria happens to recognise him)

            And it is super common for people to throw cigarettes out of their car, leave them on the ground, or throw their vape cartridges on the ground. Smokers and Cigerette companies had EVERY opportunity to be respectful. There might be some respectful ones, but, there are plenty who aren’t

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          For real. A whole fucking country infantilizing themselves. Pathetic to see bootlicking at this level.

          And it’s not even a good government. I guess I could empathize, if the government was not corrupt and delivering fantastic quality services. But they’re shitting on these people, and telling them to say thank you for it.

          • auzy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Wow. You’re such a rebel. /s

            If you want to fight authority, start by fighting against the rich assholes causing 30% of stonemasons(and others) to get silicosis from engineered stone. The guys making the money aren’t the ones getting sick. Help them live long enough to get justice and get paid.

            Fight against the companies and rich assholes who are still giving lots of people cancer by using asbestos products to save money (and are putting asbestos in products and not declaring it). The people manufacturing this shit are getting rich, not the people installing it (or who have it installed)

            And fight back by helping people live longer, so they can get justice against tabacco companies for lying to them and making shitty claims like claiming menthol cigarettes are medicinal. Companies like Vape4lyf had nothing in place to prevent sales of vapes to kids whilst starting petitions claiming they were needed for quitting smoking (what possible use could kids have for vapes other than to START vaping). Every shitty vape company out there is basically advertising their products as safe

            Do you think the execs give a shit if your kid dies? Nope, they have lawyers on retainer, and they’ve become increasingly good at fighting any lawsuits and running down the clock. Do you think they give a shit if the people around other smokers die from second hand smoke? Nope, because you can’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt a specific company caused an issue. People are suffering.

            Nothing says “badass” like a guy who is willing to fondle the balls of the marlboro man whilst he lies to you and dodges responsibility. Vaping is Tabacco 2.0. They’re making the exact same claims they did in the past for other products.

            I’d suggest you grow a pair and stand up for people. That takes courage. It’s not bootlicking. What you’re doing is bending over for millionaires who give no fucks about you, and defending them

              • auzy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                How do you figure?

                Seems to be working against Asbestos companies.

                And if anyone tries to cut up engineered stone onsite, it will be obvious. In fact, companies are getting actively fined. And my mate who got silicosis I’m fairly sure got a payout.

                Seems to be working fine with our Gun control.

                Seems to be working for lots of food items

                Seems to be working for lots of things. You simply don’t realise it works, because you’re not aware of them.

                If Vaping is banned, shitheads aren’t going to be vaping in public blowing smoke in our faces. And, if they’re smoking at home, people like myself can kick them out. I’m not too fussed about the ones who are respectable (I had a housemate who smoked weed, but they did it outside).

                Do you really think allow free sale of highly addictive drugs like meth is a good idea? Fuck No.

                You keep telling yourself you’re a badass fighting against bootlickers or whatever. But you’re actually just a pawn for the multi-billion dollar Tobacco industry

                • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  The fact that you think banning asbestos in construction is similar to prohibition is evidence your education system is fucked too.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        And “banning children”, wait, I mean forcing every adult to verify who they say they are online accomplishes what?

        Oh, that’s right, a massive tracking database for any bad actor to use.

        If your children get into shit, it’s your fault for not raising them right. I got into some shit as a kid, and had friends that got into more/less shit.

        I watched those fuckups raise their kids, and they learned from their own childhood experience and chose to guide their children how to use the internet properly. To understand how it works, the risks, etc.

        You can’t bubble wrap the world. The idiots (myself included) will always find a way around such safetyism, and in the process you’ll be harming everyone else.

    • cybermass@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I strongly disagree.

      Social media is terrible for mental health especially for the youth. Phones and tablets help in some areas like motor control development but also hurt other places like attention deficiencies and critical thinking, and very rarely does it lead to a kid learning how technology works (that’s usually from the computer nerds, aka kids who want a computer, doesn’t happen even close to the same rate as smart phones.

      Smart phones make people dumb. That’s my opinion. But the above are scientifically backed.

      • Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        100% agree. These things get talked up as benefits when they are mostly treated as revenue streams by the seller and distractions by the buyer. Kids and adults. We all need to be way more critical of the tech we use.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Then parents need to stop using such things as babysitters.

        And parents also need to get up in arms about lazy “educators” using tech to make their job easier (instead of making learning more effective, which is the bullshit argument that’s always used).

        • taladar@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          Most of the technical problems with learning/teaching are actually caused by sticking to outdated 19th century concepts in schools such as having the (by definition average) local teacher explain things instead of someone who actually knows how to explain the subject matter well and pretending that kids need to memorize everything in a modern world instead of incorporating the ability to look up things into the learning process.

          Most of the actual major problems with education are caused by funding structures and deliberate sabotage by parts of society who benefit from an uneducated population without critical thinking and research skills.

        • cybermass@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          Parenting is harder than ever, so I don’t blame parents.

          Back in the day you would have the mother home all the time, even more recently there was still a strong community in most places and big families meant lots of babysitters.

          Nowadays it’s fend for yourself for everybody almost everywhere, so raising a kid properly is almost impossible unless you are rich or have a lot of free time.

          • taladar@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            While I can see your point I would like to point out that that might excuse problems parents have raising their children but not parents making that everyone else’s problem by insisting the rest of the world is made child-safe somehow.

    • fluxion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      We can’t rely on the assholes running these site to ban pedophiles. They’d endorse a pedophile president if they thought it would give them less taxes/regulations.

      This is a prudent move, we’ve only seen the very beginnings if the sorts of indoctrination and manipulation our kids might be subjected to.

      Never thought I’d sound this way, but i can no longer ignore reality.

    • FuryMaker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months 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.

    • kurikai@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months 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

      • taladar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months 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
        0
        ·
        11 months 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.

    • DrunkenPirate@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months 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
        0
        ·
        11 months 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.

          • copd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months 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
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months 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
          0
          ·
          11 months 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.

          • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months 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.

          • Grimy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

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

        • General_Effort@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months 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
            0
            ·
            11 months 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.

  • Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    So what? There will be a “Yes I’m over 16” check box which will be as meaningful as the “Yes I’m over 18” one on porn sites?

    Any hope of governments or social media sites enforcing this will come with big ethical and technical compromises and I dont think anyone is actually going to really bother.

    We already have limits on what children do with other potentially harmful things like fire, sharp objects, heights and roads and they all come from parents. If this law has any real and positive impact it will be the message that it sends to parents.

  • Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Eh, I don’t think this is the best solution.

    The assumption is as soon as you turn 17 you’re smart enough and have the critical thinking skills to navigate social media without it negatively affecting you? Kinda dumb.

    There could be an argument that at least try to block it while young peoples brains are still developing, maybe there’s benefit in that.

    Older people than 16 are still duped by propaganda, and become addicted to social media, and all the negative consequences.

    What we need is regulation imo. Good, smart, progressive, altruistic regulation that is for the benefit of all. Ain’t gonna happen though, because sOcIaLiSm and “mUh FrEeDoMs”.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      The older generations always think the younger generations are lazy and lesser. They don’t believe they can parent because they know how shit they were at parenting. So they are voting to take away parental rights and give those rights to the government. And then say they are pro small government.

    • Australis13@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, there are adults (in both my generation and the previous one) who have fewer critical thinking skills than today’s teens and young adults. This feels like a band-aid solution to avoid actually fixing the problems of (1) not teaching critical thinking and logic and (2) the toxic content, misinformation and disinformation on these platforms (I recognise the second one is much harder whilst trying to preserve security and privacy as well).

  • Lung@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Then I read that chat apps and YouTube would not be banned, and scoffed

    Literally chat apps are social media. You can post stories and pump memes and news. You can even have bots that scrape and post content. YouTube is just a matter of checking a box whether it’s “for kids” and they already do that. Basically the whole thing is stupid

  • MimicJar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months 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.

    • essteeyou@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months 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
        0
        ·
        11 months 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.

      • MimicJar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months 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.

        • rcbrk@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

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

          Sure, but gov ID is permitted as an option if another non-ID option is also available.

          Simply choose between submitting your government ID or, say, switch on your front facing camera so we can perform some digital phrenology to determine your eligibility.

      • MimicJar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months 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.

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months 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.

  • gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I work tech in schools (in Australia) there are definitely tech savvy enough kids that will probably spool up their own fediverse instances

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I work with tech security and once a corporate blog post I wrote got from 1,000 monthly views to 100k because kids were looking up proxy tool guides and it was for Roblox lmao

      This law is incredibly illiterate

    • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I know right. I used to be a kid who bypassed school firewalls and restrictions all the time. This is going to make no difference.

        • rnercle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          “freedom” of kids and teenagers to rot their immature brains on “social media”?

          freedom to be manipulated by Zuckerberg and his minions?

          freedom to learn what a “real man” is from sexist assholes

          freedom to develop bottomless insecurities before constructing a semblance of a “self” to get you through the grit of societies

          at least they recognize the problem and … pass hopeless laws 🤷

          • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Freedom to raise your kids, and freedom to live your life as you choose, yes. Laws aren’t needed for this. Content management should come from parents, and if websites are pushing agendas or misinformation you don’t want your child on, you should be dictating what they are viewing.

            You don’t (lawfully) ban kids from parts of the library because you are worried they might read about things you don’t like, you monitor which books they are reading and tell them not to read such, or discuss why/why not those resources do not agree with or match the principles you agree with.

            This is the equivalent of banning kids talking to each other at school, on the bus or at the mall/park. If a platform is pushing harmful information then block that site, or bring a suit against the site for pushing harmful information.

            Edit: If you don’t want your kid on certain apps or sites you can start with things like this: https://families.google/familylink/ Don’t force it on other people with laws, I believe parents should have the choice for themselves. Apps like that allow you to block social media sites, restrict their app usage and reset passwords if needed.

            • rnercle@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              You don’t (lawfully) ban kids from parts of the library because you are worried they might read about things you don’t like, y…

              libraries are carefully curated. Popular “social media” of today is a shit show.

              This is the equivalent of banning kids talking to each other at school, on the bus or at the mall/park.

              no, it’s not “equivalent” to that at all. Are they banning messengers?

              Kids in schools talk through game chat anyways. Are they banning games in Australia?

              ☞ “Exemptions will apply for health and education services including YouTube, Messenger Kids, WhatsApp, Kids Helpline and Google Classroom.”

              this ban is not directed at kids, it’s targeting “big tech”.

              • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                So instead of demanding big tech companies monitor their broadcasts, they are banning kids from accessing them, how is that not directed at kids? It is explicitly directed at kids.

                • rnercle@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  it’s illegal to sell alcohol to kids, right? Would you consider that too as “banning kids from accessing them”?

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        By virtue of you actually knowing what a firewall is, and participating in the conversation, on this platform, you are ahead of 99 out of 100 people.

        • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          True, but I was that one kid who showed all of my friends how to use a VPN to bypass all the restrictions as well, and then they taught their friends.