this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
547 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

60342 readers
5336 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Landmark legislation sees the Australian government committed to the novel step of child protection by banning social media for under sixteens.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 3 points 47 minutes ago

Australia is the first nation to fail to ban social media for under 16s.

In further news, millions of teenagers have become experts at vpns and bypassing online restrictions

[–] transhetwarrior@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (4 children)

So where exactly are kids supposed to go? People will go on about "they should just go outside" but kids have literally had the cops called on them for the crime of walking around their own neighborhood "unsupervised". I've seen calls to ban kids from all sorts of places - planes, theme parks, restaurants, libraries. I've seen these "mosquito" things put up to drive kids away from public places. Kids are spending all their time on social media because they have nowhere else to go.

[–] a9cx34udP4ZZ0@lemmy.world 1 points 46 seconds ago

So where exactly are kids supposed to go? People will go on about “they should just go outside” but kids have literally had the cops called on them for the crime of walking around their own neighborhood “unsupervised”. I’ve seen calls to ban kids from all sorts of places - planes, theme parks, restaurants, libraries. I’ve seen these “mosquito” things put up to drive kids away from public places. Kids are spending all their time on social media because they have nowhere else to go.

Outside. It may take society a bit of time to adjust, just like it took a bit of time before kids not being outside became normal, but it will happen. Kids run around my town all the time unsupervised, nobody is calling the cops, and parents are looking out for each others kids. Just because some places have gone off the deep end doesn't mean everywhere has.

[–] EsmereldaFritzmonster@lemmings.world 6 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

I think this perspective (that teens have nothing else in their lives other than social media) is harmful. I don't understand why they're not able to do the same things teens did before social media......

Police being called on harmless teenagers by the same busybodies over and over again kind of sorts itself out after awhile.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

This is the travel range for kids in the UK by generation. Such a map would be far worse in the US or Australia

[–] transhetwarrior@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

They can't do the same things teenagers did before because the world has been growing more and more hostile to teenagers. More places have banned kids. We have these mosquito things making noises to drive teenagers away. It's become more difficult to get around without a car. Parents have become more helicoptery, not letting their kids out of the house. And "sorts itself out"? Here's what happens. Some asshole calls the cops on teenagers just hanging out. The cops, with nothing better to do than harass innocent people, show up and chase them away. Now those teenagers don't feel safe going back there, because they don't wanna get cops coming after them. Or maybe the cops don't stop at chasing the kids off! Maybe they get arrested for "loitering" or some nonsense. Maybe they get accused of dealing drugs because teenagers hanging around is strange and suspicious, and the cops love to frame innocent people. Cops getting called isn't some silly and frivilous thing.

[–] Cyber@feddit.uk 2 points 31 minutes ago (1 children)

Have you actually witnessed that entire event pan out?

The police that I personally know, visit the caller and talk to them first to understand the complaint and often (but I agree not always) educate the caller that teenagers are just doing what the caller(s) did at their age... usually, there are no more calls and all groups move on with their lives.

Unfortunately, that doesn't make headlines and it's not emotive enough to discuss.

In my personal experience, the older generations trust the media and just believe / expect the worst will happen. Most parents, younger adults, just don't see the problem.

[–] transhetwarrior@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 23 minutes ago

The police that I personally know, visit the caller and talk to them first to understand the complaint and often (but I agree not always) educate the caller that teenagers are just doing what the caller(s) did at their age... usually, there are no more calls and all groups move on with their lives.

do you happen to be white

[–] EsmereldaFritzmonster@lemmings.world 2 points 40 minutes ago* (last edited 27 minutes ago)

Look, I don't live in Australia, but the way you describe it makes it sound like every single person is a cunt and every place is exactly the same, urban or rural.

Tell me the places with these mosquito sounds.

Can they take public transport or their bikes? A group have their parent or other family provide rides?

Parents aren't helicoptery enough of this is the kind of shit teens are up against day in and day out.

Here's what happens when the cops show up to a busy body call. The cops show up, they ask what's going on, they see nothing illegal is happening and leave. Kids continue living their lives. Can't loiter at the park. Don't trespass or loiter in a parking lot or other private property. If they keep calling, the cops start recognizing whose calling and stop questioning the same kids over and over. Cops always give warnings about loitering. If your police are arresting minors for loitering, you got bigger problems. Honestly, isn't it just a ticket?

Whether or not cops are safe depends on many factors, but having the cops know where you're kids are isn't a terrible thing.

cops love to frame innocent people

Get off the internet and crime shows

How dangerous are the police in Australia? How many fatalities? How often?

Edit: advocating for after school programs / funding would be worthwhile. I think your perspective is exaggerated and dismissive, but we could potentially agree on this much.

I'm old enough to remember I spent my days riding my bike around town, exploring the woods, hanging out at friends' houses, going to the pizza place and hitting baseballs at the school field with my brothers.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 39 minutes ago)

They will create their own places... which might not actually be desirable for the government lol

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

If only this applied to the parents as well... No more using your children online to make a buck as an influencer.

[–] Obi@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I assume that was already the case before, as far as I know that's also not allowed here in my EU country (but I'm just making assumptions).

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

After a quick Google, I agree that your making assumptions as for the EU in general.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 12 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Now kids will be forced to hide being a victim of cyber-bullying from their parents. Great work!

[–] uis@lemm.ee 2 points 3 hours ago

If their parents are social media

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

If they don't have an online presence and neither do their peers, how would they be cyber bullied?

I'm sure bullying will go on, old school, in the streets, but cyber bullying is one of the things that will go away with this

I think this is great. There are about one or two generations worth of people that had social media while being kids and I think they should stop acting as if it's the end of the world if it would go away. I fully understand that you grew up with it and don't know any netter but believe you me: you can do without, you can survive without, you will be better without.

Go outside, touch grass, have fun, be a kid again.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 28 minutes ago* (last edited 26 minutes ago)

If you think this is going to actually stop kids from getting on social media, I have a bridge to sell you.

All it's going to do is push kids to hide their social media apps, which they'll get either through a VPN or faking the ID check, which gives parents even less visibility into what's going on with their children online.

[–] bigschnitz@lemmy.world 10 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

A few years ago the Australian government spent an enormous amount of money on a proposed firewall to protect the children. After years of development they were ready to pilot test their white elephant, and discovered that, on average, the Australian 12 year old could bypass it in ten minutes.

It's unlikely that the government could even enforce an obstacle as robust as the "are you 18+" checkbox that porn sites opt in to. This new law will not have any influence on under 16s online presence.

[–] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago

I'm an Australian, and I don't remember the 'firewall' that you're talking about. Do you have a link or something to remind me?

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

All of a sudden their test scores start going through the roof.

[–] viking@infosec.pub 1 points 1 hour ago

Attention span >3 minutes would be something already.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 30 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Oh those poor kids.

I remember when we banned porn for the under 18s and now nobody under 18 can access porn.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

This is my favorite argument against government regulation.

Anything not foolproof definitely isn't worth doing at all.

[–] bigschnitz@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago

Theres a scale of influence, with a big difference between foolproof and entirely unenforceable.

In this case, it's effectively unenforceable, so what's the point in wasting time and effort drafting something that won't actually make any difference?

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 7 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

It doesnt need to be 100% effective.

load more comments
view more: next ›