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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I’m not sure you follow. I’m postulating whether or not say facebook would have to lock someones account and force them to upload ID because they happened to have browsed it while inside the state. This would not be looked upon kindly by other states.
They would force ID check from anyone accessing from inside Florida. Once they left Florida they could access freely. A 16 yr old from Georgia on spring breakin Florida would have to age verify until they went home, at which point the verification would no longer be required.
None of that is how this works. Forcing companies like fb that I wouldn’t trust with a recipe to store (even temporarily) copies of peoples ID or other documents is not the same as having a store eyeball an ID or in the case of some places swipe or scan the ID card to verify that’s its legit.
I don’t disagree about certain versions of social media coupled with the angst and issues with being a kid not being healthy and I’ve kept my use to a min even going so far as deleting my fb years ago. That said, these type of laws do nothing but the opposite of their intentions.
What we need is all kids sitting through a class about the good and bad about social media and teaching them how to be safe and smart when interacting online.
I’d suggest you think through what can and will happen when random support people have access to peoples IDs. Hint, they won’t be sending them cookies.
Seriously. This kind of thing doesn’t work online unless you go the China route and if you want that, you can kindly move to a country already doing it and let’s keep some semblance of common sense here.
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.
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?
Eh… social media isn’t harmful on its own in moderation. It’s companies that game the system against their users to feedback loop rage and hate that’s the real issue.
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
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.
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?
A stopped clock is right specifically twice a day. Any broken clock is right eventually. the only way a clock can be never right is if it works properly and is only desynchronized.
That’s not true. e.g. If a clock loses time as soon as it is started (given power, wound), a time x. Then every day it will be wrong. Now, after n days it will come back around to being correct again. But, if n >> the life of the clock, then no, it will never be correct.
I can think of a few other scenarios where it’s also true that it will never be correct.
But, if n >> the life of the clock, then no, it will never be correct.
After the life of the clock, it will be stopped, and thus right twice per day.
As you said, it may take a very long time to lap the clock, but once you stop drawing distinctions between “never” and “sufficiently infrequent”, you get into the question of acceptable precision. Most people would consider an analog, two-handed clock to be “correct” so long as it is accurate to the minute. That means the threshold of tolerance for a “slow” clock would be the loss of at least one minute per 12 hour period to remain “incorrect”. That means you’ll lap the clock, and it will be correct, every 720 cycles, or about once a year.
If it loses time faster, you’ll lap it faster. If it loses time slower, it will spend more consecutive cycles as “correct” within acceptable tolerance. It’s possible to devise a mechanism which alternates between running fast and slow to ensure that it is actually never correct, but that would have to be built as an accessory mechanism on top of a functioning desynchronized clock in order to ensure that it’s really never.
I’m convinced, the accuracy of the clock matters. Your point that within one minute is on time is fair and as you said converges quickly. Definitely quicker than the life cycle of a regular clock. I’m a convert now.
Hmmm, this presents an interesting philosophical line of questioning: is the “clock” the user interface, or the underlying mechanism? I can easily replace the hands of they’re ripped off, so long as the mechanism keeps time then I’d say the clock isn’t broken in any meaningful way.
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”.
Sure it is. Platforms could for example close online sign ups and make people go to a physical location to open an account. Just like with banks. This of course will not pass but the issue is not that you can’t enforce age limit. Banks do it. Online banks also do it. The issue is that enforcing this would kill the platforms.
This is where the challenge will be I think. Xitter wants a copy of my ID to validate who I am and what age? No thanks. There’s no reason to allow that. No reason they need that. No reason to give them or any social media site the ability to stock pile that info to later be leaked.
Add comment