That's because we should be regulating the social media industry rather than regulating social media users.
Unfortunately, social media users don't have billions of dollars to spend on lobbying and related activities around the world.
That's because we should be regulating the social media industry rather than regulating social media users.
Unfortunately, social media users don't have billions of dollars to spend on lobbying and related activities around the world.
> That's because we should be regulating the social media industry rather than regulating social media users.
These lawsuits and regulations are against the industry, not the users.
The regulations and lawsuits are driving the pressure to ID check users and remove end-to-end encryption.
The ask is to treat users differently based on age. How can they do that without verifying their users age?
we should be removing the harmful aspects of modern social, which are harmful for everyone not just minors, by making them unprofitable or even outright illegal.
Instead we are saying "only adults should use this" which, while technically regulating the industry, places the restriction on users.
We're treating it like tobacco or alcohol (2 industries who have similarly spent millions upon millions of dollars in lobbying efforts) but we should be treating it like asbestos.
OK, so what would be in the text of this law making it enforceable and not easily game-able by the social media companies and without severe unintended consequences?
Why are you asking lawmaker questions of people on HN? What kind of answer are you expecting?
Just because I don't know how to write a law that can prevent it doesn't mean that I can't recognize an actual issue when I see it.
Because people like you then go and vote for politicians without actually understanding what they are proposing.
It's all Trump style "believe me I know how to fix it" and you will vote for the person that pushes your buttons regardless of whether they have a plausible solution or not.
So only lawyers should be allowed to vote, otherwise we are subjected to ad hominem attacks?
Lack of an informed populace has gotten us the government we have today in the US. I think we can do better.
It very much seems like you think you could do better. Not being a lawyer does not make someone part of an uninformed populace.
So everyone should go to law school?
You honestly think facebook has no idea that the children using their website are children? The combination of the children's selfies, social network, GPS coordinates, and posts make it very clear. Facebook already knows who the children are and they've been explicitly targeting them accordingly.
You want people to be kicked off the internet because they have a baby face? You think the law should mandate the use of an imperfect facial recognition system?
I think that facebook has been using facial recognition on every photo uploaded to their platform for a very very long time and that they already use that data in part to determine the age of users. Facebook hasn't been kicking anyone off the internet because of that data so far. Instead facebook just targeted the users they decided were children as children.
Forcing the users to verify their age changes nothing. It gives the illusion of "doing something" but it just gives facebook data they already had. What's still needed is regulating social media platforms themselves to place explicit limits on what they can do to hurt their users, including children.