An Angus Reid survey says three-quarters of more than 4,000 respondents are in favour of a ban like the one in Australia, where youth under 16 are prevented from setting up accounts on TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat and Threads.

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 days ago

    I agree, BUT it needs to be the parents who enforce it by simply not giving them pocket computers.

    New laws should always be the last resort, not the go-to “solution”.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      it needs to be the parents who enforce it by simply not giving them pocket computers.

      then the local schools insist on using social media apps for information.

      • definitemaybe@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Which is why it should be illegal, but enforcement should be light.

        It’s ridiculous to require websites to validate users ages. That’s either a massive security vulnerability waiting to be exploited, or pointlessly easy to bypass.

        Instead, we should treat it like “bad parenting” and treated like a form of neglect, with social workers helping parents learn about the harms of social media.

        Then, we don’t lose our civil liberties and human rights while still “protecting the kids”. Let’s put the millions of dollars that the age verification middleware was going to charge and put that money towards social workers and mental health counsellors, eh?

        But, most of all, we need to make addictive patterns* themselves illegal, and also the dark patterns that trick users into making choices that benefit the platform over their own interests.

        * Although I worry that they might make videogames that depend on random chance illegal, too. Loot collection RPGs are only fun because of the random chance at loot, but I worry they’ll be caught by “gatcha/loot box regulations” if the laws are written by clueless politicians.

          • TotalCourage007@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            I’d forcefeed this thread to the simpletons just blindly agreeing to losing our freedom. I didn’t choose to be a parent so why should MY freedom be affected? SECURITY is what keeps people safe not the opposite FFS.

    • jaselle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s a coordination problem; your child is greatly disadvantaged in many ways by being the only one without a phone. So it needs everyone to fix the problem simultaneously; this isn’t really practical without a gov’t intervention.