this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
295 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59135 readers
2878 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 114 points 9 months ago (4 children)

This bill must be funded by VPN services because anyone who thinks teens won’t figure out a workaround has never tried to stop teens from anything. Disobeying is what they do on an evolutionary level.

[–] FlavoredButtHair@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Also using sites such as "This Person Doesn't Exist" to generate am AI pic of a human could be used for profile pics.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 15 points 9 months ago

Good, the kids could use the tech experience

[–] mPony@kbin.social 3 points 9 months ago

spot-on observation. always follow the money

[–] smut@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 9 months ago

They also may have run the numbers and decided that social media teaches more kids to accept people regardless of race, gender, sexuality or neurotypicality than it trains to be far-right xenophobic dogshit.

I can't really think of any other reason they'd do this. They don't do anything unless it's in their self interest.

[–] DarthYoshiBoy@kbin.social 81 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Banning Social Media FOR KIDS. Is just a quick means to spy on what ADULTS are getting up to on the Internet. Right now if you don't want to ID yourself to go see cat pics/videos on Instagram/TikTok, you can just sign up for an account and go searching for cat pics/videos. With this bill, if you want to go find cat pics/videos on Instagram/TikTok in the state of Florida, you'll have to submit a government ID to verify that you're not a kid, and I'd believe for about as long as I can breathe water that the linking of my real identity/government ID with a social media account will have no negative real world outcomes.

Cybersecurity is something that almost nobody takes seriously. I used to say that nobody takes it seriously until they're hurt by their poor cyber hygiene, but these days the insurance policies pay the same either way so companies/people still do the bare minimum and call it a day.

I'd much rather pay a VPN provider to be out of that jurisdiction than ever give anyone anything that concretely ties my online persona to my actual identity and it's just incredible that lawmakers so fundamentally misunderstand how this all works that they don't know it's that easy.

[–] Infinite_Indecision@midwest.social 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Is this based on a gov ID? I didn't see that in the article.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 31 points 9 months ago (1 children)

How else do you think they'd do age verification? It's the same way they do it for porn sites, you upload you DL/passport/ID to verify your age. The difference here is that now these ~~data broker~~ social media companies now have a hard link to your identity instead of a pretty strong inference, and are able to shore up their advertising profiles in an unprecedented way.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world 58 points 9 months ago

Sounds totally enforceable!

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 40 points 9 months ago (6 children)

This is very obviously unenforceable

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

At least not without major violations to privacy.

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

It's a feature

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yep. It's a direct violation of freedom of speech fair one thing.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] soulfirethewolf@lemdro.id 40 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It would also require that social media sites use "reasonable age verification methods" to verify users' ages.

Please no :/

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] watson387@sopuli.xyz 33 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] rdyoung@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago (7 children)

The smarter kids will just go in and change their bday or create a new account that has them old enough. The only way to prevent that is to make them verify ID on every single person logging in from a Florida based ip or is a resident. But, what about those who are traveling from other states, should they also be forced to upload ID? I'm going to say no.

[–] DreamTraveler@lemm.ee 33 points 9 months ago (1 children)

NOBODY should have to to upload any sort of ID to use the internet. The issue began when corporations started getting involved. Fuck Ajit Pai, Ethan Zuckerman and the political world all tied to this. Amazon is trying to force people to upload ID for refunds.. pathetic.

[–] rdyoung@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Oh I wholly agree. The point of that was to illustrate what you have to do to enforce it properly. It's the same as trying to force porn sites to ID their users.

As for Amazon, I have not heard anything about this and I recently did a couple of returns with no request for my license. Also, you may not be aware but stores like home depot already require ID to return items and they (with the help of a 3rd party) keep a credit file of sorts on you and uses that determine who has been abusing the return process.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

what a fucking dogshit state. not that social media is good for anyone, but restricting kids from one of their main forms of communication / news / outlet to the world is just designed to be obnoxious.

even best case scenario, active malice aside, these people somehow have zero memory of what it was like to be a kid; having to wake up for school at 6am and do endless homework for no material benefit, and now this

[–] Patches@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Question: How old are you?

Social media wasn't known until I was 16(?) and I'm a millennial. So no these people did not grow up with social media as most politicians are older than me.

It's insane you think kids today need social media like they need exercise, fun and oxygen.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I would suggest that it didn't happen in its most well known form until we were older (MySpace launched just after I graduated high school), but it did exist. Communities and message boards were a thing before MySpace and Facebook.

Kids today do need a sense of community. And we have enshittified the outside so much that they aren't likely to get that spending time in public. How far will this spread? Social media isn't just Instagram, or xitter, or the like. It's also things like steam, or video game forums, or anything with a chat feature. Kids make meaningful connections with others this way. Not all social media is bad.

How many afterschool clubs still exist? How many group activities are catered around school (but not school) these days that aren't sports? Where is the place that is for kids in our communities?

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No one should be banned from equal internet access for any reason. 🤦🤦🤦

See, this is why I hate DeSantis and the right wing. They crow about freedom of speech from one end and shit crap like this out of the other.

[–] smut@lemmynsfw.com 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's because they're lying.

I'm sure you know that the words that come out of their mouth are worthless because of actions like this but for some reason, millions of people politely accept it.

They're never going to admit out loud "We just use freedom of speech to shame people out of deplatforming far-right extremists, we don't actually believe in it" or "We know the second amendment will never be used to overthrow a tyrant and we fully intend to be tyrants. We support it because it brings in $16 million a year in bribes and gains us millions of supporters who will tolerate literally anything except domestic abusers not having guns".

Every abuser has an excuse and it's never "I just really enjoy abusing people".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (2 children)

For once Florida is doing something good.

At least it would be if they weren't simply doing this to prevent kids from becoming more informed.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Eh… yes and no. On the one hand, kids are undoubtedly addicted to social media, and their screen time should be limited for the sake of their mental health.

On the other hand, this is absolutely not going to limit most kids time on social media. They aren’t idiots, and some of them are (properly) tech savvy. Meaning a bunch of kids are going to find an easy workaround, and spread that info around.

And this is almost certainly going to result in an ID requirement similar to the laws requiring ID for porn sites in certain companies. And unlike PornHub, I don’t trust that Facebook, Twitter, Reddit or the others are going to actually have integrity when it comes to ID laws.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Solution: nobody should be on social media.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Lemmy is social media… any site we communicate through is social media, even old style forums are social media. Hell, even Stack Exchange could be considered social media. Should those be banned?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] thoughts3rased@sopuli.xyz 5 points 9 months ago

I'd agree if the ban extended to news articles online.

It doesn't.

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago (9 children)

Wow, broken clock and all that.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Maruki_Hurakami@lemm.ee 11 points 9 months ago (3 children)

What is Gaetz going to do?

[–] FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world 27 points 9 months ago

Another highschooler?

[–] rdyoung@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

Nothing will change. The adult filters didn't work 30+ years ago and they don't work now.

I see at least 2 ways around this depending on how it's implemented.

  1. Either update age info to be "old enough"

Or

  1. Use a vpn that has you accessing it from anywhere but Florida.

This is just one more waste of time that will be struck down by a court assuming it makes into law.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] muse@kbin.social 3 points 9 months ago

He could try dating a little older. 17 for example

[–] ombremad@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 9 months ago

Can't go on the Internet, can't go in public restrooms... Land of freedom.

[–] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Bah they’ll just do it in secret instead of openly.

[–] TheEntity@kbin.social 8 points 9 months ago

Ah yes, just what Florida needs: even more closeted everything.

[–] mavu@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 9 months ago

Well, it's about 15 years too late, but I guess better to have this discussion now than never.

[–] badbytes@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

Internet too dangerous. Florida, just ban it entirely, just to be extra safe.

[–] JudiDench@lemmy.zip 5 points 9 months ago

First Amendment violation

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I can get behind the spirit of the bill, but I wouldn’t hold my breath when it comes to enforcement.

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 22 points 9 months ago (3 children)

The spirit behind the bill is "We need more control over the children so we can indoctrinate them ourselves!"

[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

And to stifle their voices

[–] Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Or just let them discover random fucking propaganda on their own and bad examples on social media and become an Andrew Tate jr by the age of 17 or some extremist little fucker, or just be an indecent human being if you don't want such an extreme example.

This bill will do jack shit, but so are the parents who put smartphones in their kids hands as early as possible and let them browse the internet unsupervised.

Just to be clear I do not agree with the bill in this form and the whole "provide an ID" bullshit, but I really don't think young children should be allowed on social media.

[–] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Florida has been banning books talking about racism and LGBT people from school library. I guarantee to you, this is not about preventing anyone from becoming extremist fuckers.

[–] Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I know you are right and they are just using the "save our children" sentiment to manipulate people. On the other hand I just really-really hate social media and the younger generation should be better off without it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›