Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
While this is obviously bad, I don't think there's ever really a total win or loss when it comes to this stuff. It's a constant fight. They'll bring shit like this in and it'll seem hopeless, then someone will bypass it and it'll go back and forth. Same as ad blocking or DRM or countless other things.
It'd be nice to not have to deal with it in the first place, but we'll deal with it sooner or later I'm sure.
I hate EU. Nothing but bad news from them.
Strange title. Big tech lost huge on this. They want to advertise to your kids. These bans make sense to protect the vulnerable.
A) It's very unlikely to actually stop kids from accessing social media. VPN's, purchasing blackmarket accounts that have already been verified, classic fake ID's (in the age of AI generated images, no less). So they'll just keep building profiles for them anyway (it's already known they do this now for people not actually signed up with social media, their trackers are all over the web and it's easy to build a profile without concerted effort against it). Why do we always think "this time for sure forcing abstinence will work!"? It never does.
B) In addition to not actually stopping building profiles on kids, it now hands them a goldmine of information on adults. Mandates it, even. Data leaks are going to get a lot more "fun"...
It's not an age restriction. It's a mandatory ID for everybody. They know we hate them, and are afraid. Perhaps they should make a law against killer drones instead.
So how is that going to work exactly?
Facebook is easy, you force the company or block it.
But how about, say, Lemmy, or other self hosted places maybe where where people do use their real names? How is any of this supposed to work?
But how about, say, Lemmy, or other self hosted places
Well... how many Lemmy instances are hosted in the EU, Canada, USA, Australia, UK, ...? They can be threatened under the full power of the state, unless they req ID checks.
OK, you may say, just use one in Tuvalu! But someone below mentioned it. Govs will not think, gosh darn it! I guess we got foiled by those rascally nerds! Pack it up guys, we lost! No, they will double down. They will create national firewalls. VPN bans. Already the UK, and Utah in the USA are pushing for VPN bans. They will make examples of people, to deter the rest.
It's very hard to solve political probs with technical methods.
Literally 1984. Those who will refuse to sell their private info to big capitalist will be limited, thus they will be information restricted.
Can we not stay up to date with what is happening without owning a social media account? I think the only thing we are missing is social media trends that change frequently.
Should be banning endless manipulative opaque algorithmic presentations for everyone.
Require age verification only if you want to get algorithmic recommendations. That way you can still engage in the social internet anonymously as an adult.
The recommendation algorithms give American big tech way too much political sway in Europe and ideally they should be banned entirely, but age verification at least gives the appearance that this is "for the children" and not something with (justifiable) political motivations.
But its not age verification thats actually being implemented. It's identity verification mislabelled to take advantage of dumb legislation with yet more privacy over reach.
I would never have believed it possible that almost all politicians of ostensibly democratic countries almost simultaneously agree to prevent young people from having fun, being happy and finding meaning and fulfillment in their lives. How do these people think of themselves as the good guys?
you're shocked that the countries that love to bomb children abroad also dont like children at home?
also the epstein stuff.
Most people support these social media age gates:
this poll is for canada, not the eu, but I couldn't find good polling for the EU.
to prevent young people from having fun, being happy and finding meaning and fulfillment in their lives.
Hasn't virtually every single study ever performed on the subject found a strong, direct link between unhappiness and social media use?
Depends what counts as social media. YouTube could very much be implicated as a social media. Reddit/Lemmy obviously. There's a ton of legitimately educational material on both platforms. What about Steam? With chat/friends/community function, isn't that a social media? Where is the line drawn?
How well have these studies accounted for neuro-divergence in kids (something Europe has generally done a pretty poor job accommodating)? What about kids with certain disabilities that put them indoors often if not essentially always? Isn't the isolation worse for their mental health?
Is there not some point at which you really do just have to depend on parents being parents? I accept that some state involvement is necessary sometimes, but this really feels pretty solidly in the purview of something that should be up to parental judgement.
Youtube is a massive problem for boys. There may be a couple of educational things on there but it's adjacent to awful recommended content.
I would debate the value of the "educational" content as well. We certainly aren't getting smarter through the internet. Read a book, find a mentor, stay in school.
Youtube is a massive problem for boys. There may be a couple of educational things on there but it’s adjacent to awful recommended content.
So is it worth losing access to Veritasium, Extra History, Professor Dave Explains, countless sources for learning programming...? This is like banning kids from TV because Jackass exists. It's always been parents' job to help guide their kids towards media that is more wholesome and fulfilling rather than tripe.
True of books, too, by the way... the written word isn't an automatically higher art. Pulp has always been a thing, and anyone who actually does do a lot of reading can confirm there is a lot of tripe out there right now in book form.
Read a book, find a mentor, stay in school.
Learning to use digital content is a big part of school. It isn't the 70's anymore. This is like pushing for abstinence only education... it is pretty much proven, from sex ed to drugs, not to work. You need to teach responsible use.
Youtube as a platform is trash (in my opinion). Not to say there aren't some gems in there.
I'm not familiar with the channels you mentioned but trust your judgment. I would love to see a platform curated with high quality content.
"Hey mom and dad can I use 'historyTube'" "Absolutely!"
Easy.
The analogies don't really hold. Traditional Broadcasters have some standards. Jackass is Disney compared to the back alley swamp that is YouTube.
Think about the experience of going into a library or bookstore vs. YouTube, the content mix is not comparable.
The algorithms, content scale, and access is another world.
I would love to see a platform curated with high quality content.
Nebula. It isn't perfect, and it needs more creators, but that's the closest I've come.
“Hey mom and dad can I use ‘historyTube’” “Absolutely!”. Easy.
Well, not if it's banned as social media, that's the issue.
Traditional Broadcasters have some standards.
Broadcasters did because they had laws restricting their content. Cable very much did not.
Think about the experience of going into a library or bookstore vs. YouTube, the content mix is not comparable.
My experience is that the stuff pushed by most libraries as their hot new items, things to read, general recommendations, are pretty much slop. Romantasy slop is a big genre all its own.
Which isn't to say people can't enjoy it, but it really isn't much better than YouTube slop.
The algorithms , content scale, and access is another world.
Now that, I agree is an issue, but that's just as true for adults as we've seen. I'd have less issue restricting how algorithms are pushed than mandatory ID... it would benefit all of society, not just kids, and it's actually a positive improvement on privacy since it disincentivizes profile building.
The Australian ban, and proposed bans in other countries (generally I only looked at a couple) aren't targeting things like Nebula though, focus is on large scale user to user platforms.
I just checked out YouTube front page in a fresh browser and it's several tiers below Romantasy in my opinion. You may have a more personalized experience, but the front door of Youtube is... nauseating.
The medium matters as well, the audio, visuals, length, like a sleezy, hyper active content casino.
Anyway, I cheer for any friction added to these tech companies because they are doing so much harm, so anything to slow them down.
But I do get the concerns around IDs and privacy (I personally wouldn't provide any). I think regulatory capture concerns are real as well. My preference would be on targeting the recommendation systems, and also making the platforms liable for content they are broadcasting.
You may have a more personalized experience, but the front door of Youtube is… nauseating.
Is that really a good reason for banning its use for kids? Again, this is like shutting off library access because the stuff presented at the front is slop... my library presents slop at the front door, I don't think that should stop kids from going inside.
I'd also point out at least my library doesn't do any age verification or ID checks either.
Anyway, I cheer for any friction added to these tech companies because they are doing so much harm, so anything to slow them down.
I think this is cutting off your nose to spite your face though when it allows... mandates, rather, a huge collection of data. I'm not so sure big tech is really against this... early iterations of code to verify age were said to not store any data, but auditors found that to not be the case. That was walked back, but I find it very unlikely they won't just do it again when there's less scrutiny.
Especially since kids are likely going to just get on through backdoors anyway, we've likely done very little to stop data collection on them while handing them most adults on a silver platter. That's in no way a score for the little guy.
I'm totally on board with fucking tech companies, I just don't think this does it while simultaneously it fucks us.
It's not at all comparable. If I go into a library and get a book on fixing cars, the librarian doesn't follow me around suggesting Joe Rogan.
Kids books from the library don't autoplay a pipeline of incrementingly extreme, dangerous or vapid content.
I don't see the value in the data being greater than the cost of administrating a patchwork of varied regulations across the globe.
It’s not at all comparable. If I go into a library and get a book on fixing cars, the librarian doesn’t follow me around suggesting Joe Rogan.
Most people access their libraries via digital platforms like Libby as well these days. Unless you're just going full Luddite and we're just saying no digital access to anything at all.
I don’t see the value in the data being greater than the cost of administrating a patchwork of varied regulations across the globe.
This is a very strange position from someone posting in this community. You don't think, even assuming no ill intentions, there's any security risk in allowing big tech to access, and likely store, official identification? Data leaks happen all the time. If you wouldn't publicly post your identification information, you should see the value in that data.
We certainly aren't getting smarter through the internet.
Speak for yourself. I am, without a doubt.
To a large degree, yes, but blanket bans on social media use for minors will fail for multiple reasons.
Point 3:
Adults have been making the outside more and more hostile for kids. There's no more third spaces. So like you said, they're removing a third space with nothing to replace it with.
I wonder how much more effective the Australian ban will be when peer countries follow suite and erodes network effect.
On the bright side, young people are learning about circumventing government censorship.
Very true, but that may make things worse down the line. Once they realize that kids are circumventing their restrictions, they won't think, "Hmm, maybe a blanket ban of social media for minors wasn't a great idea." They're just going to double down and say that there needs to be more hardcore restrictions on all internet/computer activity. More sensorship, more data harvesting, mandatory governement spyware in all devices.
Essentially the Great Firewall in China. Many governments have already expressed interest in modeling national internet access after China.
Hasn’t virtually every single study ever performed on the subject found a strong, direct link between unhappiness and social media use?
From what I've seen, the answer is it's complicated. On avg, you're right, and it prob does cause unhappiness and mental health probs. But there are unique situations where it can be helpful. Ex, people who do not fit norms of thier peers, and find healthy connections with others more like themselves. So it has no single, simple universal answer.
The algos, esp on big tech social media like FB, IG, TT, X, etc, are very much designed to make you unhappy and outraged. Even the data scientists who designed the algos have testified to that fact before the US congress. B/c anger and outrage is the most powerful way to make you engage more. TT's internal research shows the more you use TT, the more probs you have with cognitive skills like memory formation, empathy, and anxiety.
Ofc, the harms of social media doesn't mean these bills are the right way to handle that. I believe we have a prob. But this is not the right solution.
If that is so, which I do not know, the only logical explanation is that people who are already unhappy, for unrelated reasons, are more likely to need to find at least some happiness in their lives by participating in online communities.
because these are not democratic countries, these countries are the same that gave birth to fascism and pushed for years for the surveillance state you so fondly complain about in china, the same countries that kill people based on metadata, this is the logical conclusion. as always, ewwwrope is filled to the brim with the flowery phrases of rhetoric and not actual praxis on any meaningful thing that could imply the wellbeing of their citizens.
Now to ban it for all the other age groups, too. /s but only kinda
Kinda with you in spirit. How I think about it is... it is harmful for both adults and children. Esp in big-tech co form. FB, IG, TT, X, and w/e. There's a lot of research about it. But the cure can be worse than the disease. What the EU wants to do is not the right answer to address the immense harms of social media to our world.
Both the US and Canada have similar bills on boil. Both are also terrible ideas.