Google urges US lawmakers not to ban teenagers from social media.::San Francisco– Google has asked the US Congress not to ban teenagers from social media, urging lawmakers to drop problematic protections like age-verification technology. The tech giant released its ‘Legislative Framework to Protect Children and Teens Online’ that came as more lawmakers, like Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), pushed for the Kids Online Safety Act, a …

  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    While I’m not really that fond of the government telling people what websites they can and can’t visit, this would probably be a net good for kids. The fact that Google is against probably means doubly so.

    • virr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a response to the very bad kids online safety act. See EFF’s post for details on why it is bad: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/03/kids-online-safety-act-heavy-handed-plan-force-platforms-spy-young-people

      EFF’s article is better, but here are some of the details of why it is bad. The effect of kids online safety act will be censorship and tracking of kids online when research suggests that is counterproductive for the age group being added. Would require more detailed tracking of everyone, not just kids. Services likely would need to block certain content from everyone to reduce liability to a reasonable level. They would potentially be liable if kids got access to content even when it wasn’t for kids no matter how the kids got access (lying, using someone else’s account, bypassing filters, etc.). Content to be blocked is vague and open to be interpretation by the most conservative people in the US, which is obviously problematic. The previous COPPA needs updating, but the version of kids online safety act has so far been financially flawed.

    • shiroininja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I’m not into the government limiting the internet at all. Also, sometimes the internet is a safe haven for people who are alone or have trouble with their peers. Anonymity can help also get things off your chest, and be yourself. Although the big social media players aren’t about anonymity.

      Young pre-Autism me was helped greatly by the early internet and chat rooms. And adult me really is surviving socially online due to living in an area hostile to me and and indifferent at best. Discord, Matrix, and IRC have great communities that have made me feel welcome and share interests. I’d be completely isolated and alone without them.

      But notice I didn’t say traditional social media. I don’t like algorithms manipulating and all the tracking.

      • saturnus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah the obvious solution is to ban harvesting and storing of especially identifying data and the associated targeted ads etc but that will certainly never happen.

      • Godort@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I suspect that if this does pass it will have about as much efficacy as preventing kids from looking at online pornography.

        Many of the more technical-focused communication tools like IRC and Matrix will probably not even notice the change

          • sir_reginald@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            end to end encryption in public chats like the typical IRC channel or public Matrix chatrooms is useless. Anyone can join, then anyone can decrypt the messages just by joining.