Take your hand off my kids ipads

Remove this Banner Ad

I went and had a look:

  • The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (the Bill) introduces an obligation on certain social media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent children under 16 years of age from having an account.
  • It is the responsibility of the eSafety Commissioner to write guidelines on the ‘reasonable steps’ to be taken by age-restricted social media platforms.
  • Details on what may be included in these guidelines, such as what age estimation or age verification technology may be used, is not included in the Bill.
  • The obligation for certain social media platforms to restrict under-age account holders will not commence for at least 12 months, with the date to be set by the Minister.
  • Research, including by the eSafety Commissioner, suggests that there are both benefits and risks to social media use by children, and that these benefits and risks are individualised.
  • The Bill has bipartisan support. However, some experts and researchers in relevant fields have encouraged the government to pursue alternative action.
  • The Bill has been referred to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 26 November 2024.
  • At the time of writing, the Bill has not been considered by any parliamentary scrutiny committees.

Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024

Key points The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (the Bill) introduces an obligation on certain social media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent children under 16 years of age from having an account. It is the responsibility of the e
www.aph.gov.au www.aph.gov.au

I can't seem to get to the actual text of the bill. Lots of timeouts and failed to load. Probably getting hammered.
 
Last edited:
Chief said:
Comments systems on every WordPress site in the world?
Click to expand...
Yeah.

Comments system is a really interesting one. You Am I even wrote a song about it:

Don't you read those readers' comments unless
You want to lose faith in humanity's grace and
Lose all your hope in the collective frontal lobe, uh-huh
(Don't go) Go strolling down reactions unless
You want to get a hang on the sternum and the drain
Beating on the drum until all your senses numb, oh, yeah

I can tolerate reading a bit of Murdoch pres shere and there - but when you get to the comments.... and then realise that they are moderated and what they choose to let through....
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Here is the government's definition:

Under proposed section 63C, an ARSMP would be an electronic service which satisfies the following conditions:
• the sole purpose, or a significant purpose, of the service is to enable online socialinteraction between 2 or more end-users

• the service allows end-users to link to, or interact with, some or all of the other end-users

• the service allows end-users to post material on the service

• such other conditions (if any) as are set out in the legislative rules.,
Click to expand...
 
Technology always moves faster than legislation.
I think in time this bill will achieve very little.
 
Norwegian Blue said:
Going by that BF is "social media", and will be off limits to the under 16s.
Click to expand...
Which is a tiny portion of BF users I believe. And it seems like they can read it, just not have an active account.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

There'll be plenty of loopholes, and we'll only know with time how effective it is. That being said, I fully support the effort to finally do something about the harmful effects of social media for young teenagers.

I'm 23 now - meaning I was coming of age during the wild west of readily available social media. Instagram, Snapchat, various messaging apps had virtually no oversight and was just left up to the kids. I heard some horror bullying stories, thankfully never experienced anything impactful myself, but know plenty of others who were/are pretty scarred from some of the shit they went through in this phase. I'm well aware kids have always been bullied and will continue to be - but social media made the likelihood of being bullied outside of school pretty certain.

I would've hated this bill at that age, it'd feel like half your society has been taken away. But that's the problem. btdg has been pretty spot on with his analyses regarding the changes in teen behaviour (for the worse), and plenty of it has to do with that damn phone.

Plenty will call it government overreach - maybe it is. I don't really care, tbh. There has to be some form of regulation. At least this time it isn't really benefitting a lobbyist group. It's an unpopular decision that at least intends to fix a problem that everyone can admit is prevalent.
 
btdg said:
The legislation won't prevent young people from using a VPN to bypass regulations, but lets not forget that:
  • their parents now know it is illegal and have a responsibility not to allow that
  • schools now know it is illegal - students accessing it at school are making a very different choice (ie: illegal behaviour on campus is different to 'phones are supposed to be in your locker'
Click to expand...

It will not be illegal for under 16s to access social media. Parents and schools will not be culpable. The onus is totally on the social media providers to enforce this.
 
Frank Bunn said:
It will not be illegal for under 16s to access social media. Parents and schools will not be culpable. The onus is totally on the social media providers to enforce this.
Click to expand...
It looks like it's "best efforts" type language. Once a standard for that is developed, it will be in play.

Move the rules down to the body/ministry in charge, and you don't have to be specific in the law. Less specificity, less places for critics to hold on to.
 
Mofra said:
Technology always moves faster than legislation.
I think in time this bill will achieve very little.
Click to expand...

It’s just another pathetic Hail Mary from the government to get social media to “voluntarily” pull out of Australia.

There’s no details except the threat of punishments for the social media companies.

It has bipartisan support from Labor and Liberal.

Tells you all you need to know.
 
kickazz said:
They have a list, and in general, messaging and gaming seems to be excluded. I think this is because the main problems caused by SM don't manifest in these scenarios.

We need to define the list of 'problems' with SM and then see which can be fixed, and which stand a chance of being fixed (or ameliorated) by SM restrictions.

The list of problems I can think of:

  • Access to age inappropriate content
  • Grooming / exploitation
  • Extortion (becoming a thing now with nudes etc)
  • Addiction and it's related mental health issues (facebook for one actively harnesses the power of dopamine in pretty dodgy ways)
  • Bullying
  • Nefarious manipulation by state actors - though that is an adult problem too.
Click to expand...

From working in schools, something I'd really like to clarify is the problem is not 'misuse' of social media. It is social media used as intended: that is, as an addictive, omnipresent aspect of the life of young people that has come to dominate everything they do.

I'll repeat the drug analogy again because I think it is relevant/

Imagine we had a new drug whose features were that:
  • users report a mild 'high' in the form of a short-lasting dopamine hit
  • users spend almost all of their spare time 'high'; as much as 5-6 hours per day on average
  • usage rates peak at age 13;
  • the drug has an almost 100% addiction rate: that is close to 100% of users consider their own usage levels to be higher than they would like, but feel powerless to stop
  • we don't know the long-term harm and effects, but there is fairly significant evidence that at a minimum usage of the drug is associated with increased rates of anxiety, depression, ADHD, low mood and dissatisfaction with life experience
  • adults, typically also addicted themselves, were providing their children with this drug in an unlimited, neverending supply, for use in their bedroom at any moment, typically starting around age 9 or 10

What would our social response be to this drug? To mark it down as 'too hard', leave this state of affairs in place, and try and restrict the way the drug might be used in grooming, extortion, bullying and social conflict? Or to address the usage of the drug itself?
 
Chief said:
It looks like it's "best efforts" type language. Once a standard for that is developed, it will be in play.

Move the rules down to the body/ministry in charge, and you don't have to be specific in the law. Less specificity, less places for critics to hold on to.
Click to expand...

A fine of up to $50 million for breaching a rule that is not specific in law?

Frank Bunn said:
It's unclear how Australian legislation applies to overseas based platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook and BigFooty.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if anyone has addressed this.

Earlier this year, Australia's eSafety commissioner obtained a federal court injunction to force X to globally remove footage of Christian bishop, Mar Mari Emmanuel, being stabbed. Non-compliance would mean a daily fine of $785,000. X argued that the posts did did not violate X's rules on violent speech, but complied with the directive, pending a legal challenge, by blocking access for Australian IP addresses. The video remained accessible to users outside Australia, and for those within Australia who used a VPN.

www.sbs.com.au

'Friggin' disgrace': From a court battle to a boycott call, this is Elon Musk's feud with Australia

What started with a takedown order has resulted in a war of words between billionaire Elon Musk and Australian politicians. This is the feud, explained.
www.sbs.com.au www.sbs.com.au
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Take your hand off my kids ipads

Similar threads

Seeds
Australias tax system takes from the young to give to the old
2 3 4 5
Replies
114
Views
6K
peetoo
peetoo
HurleyHepsHird
NSW Liberal MP charged with 10 child sexual offences
Replies
6
Views
359
nut
nut
Gralin
Qld Government suspends Human Rights Charter to pass bill to lock kids up in adult prisons
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
Seeds
Seeds

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top