this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
755 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59599 readers
3381 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
[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 103 points 1 month ago (9 children)

For all those that think this is the government overstepping with an unenforceable law, you are not grasping the intent correctly. Declaring that we have democratically decided to have an age limit for social media means that we have laid the groundwork for collective action. This means that suddenly schools, parents, teenagers themselves, etc. all have a reason and a mandate for keeping young people off platforms that we believe to be detrimental to their development and well-being. True democratic culture lies not in bourgeoisie domination (as many Americans like to believe), but rather in mutual trust and cooperation in order to solve common and big problems.

[–] erlend_sh@lemmy.world 37 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Exactly!

It’s not about Totalizing Enforcement. What it changes is the cultural norm. Not right away but over time.

An age limit on alcohol never stopped anyone of any age to acquire alcohol, but it sets the societal bar for what’s acceptable. You don’t wanna be the parents that gave your kids alcoholic beverages at 13.

It’s always a little jarring how everyone very readily believes that the Scandinavian countries are the happiest in the world, but won’t believe that the incremental policy changes we implement here have any effect 🤷‍♂️

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 month ago

As a case study, we did this in 1988 with a smoking law that was incrementally improved with great success. It was controversial at the time, but is now generally regarded as such an obvious policy: no smoking in or around public transport, in bars and restaurants etc..

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 10 points 1 month ago

True democratic culture lies not in bourgeoisie domination (as many Americans like to believe), but rather in mutual trust and cooperation in order to solve common and big problems.

American here who has visited Scandinavia a couple times.

There are so many little differences, but they add up to a staggering divide in the amount of mutual trust and cooperation you see in little everyday interactions.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 100 points 1 month ago (13 children)

"Are you 15 or more years old? Y/N"

There, that fixed the problem.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 26 points 1 month ago (11 children)

IIRC Norway has an actual Nat ID system, so assuming they develop a workable API for it ðis could actually be implemented quite easily.

Preventing kids stealing ðeir parents' IDs to open accounts anyway will be ð actual challenge.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 37 points 1 month ago (8 children)

Is there a reason that you use some character (I'm afraid I don't know the name of it) wherever you would otherwise use "th"? I can't guess if it's some kind of technical issue with federated text, something from a different language you're incorporating, or one of those "I think we should add x symbol to the language so I'll use it to draw attention to the effort" deals, like with the people that use the combined !? symbols whenever both are relevant at once.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 61 points 1 month ago (3 children)

It's a thorn, a letter making a th sound. Still in use in Icelandic, I think. In English, it's archaic at best.

Fun fact, when it fell out of use, the letter Y was used to replace it for a while. So when you see something saying "ye olde", verbally it's still "the old".

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 1 month ago

I actually always wondered about the y in old texts. Thanks!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] elliot_crane@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I’m probably doing exactly what they want here (e.g. having a conversation about it), but that letter is called “Eth” and was the Old English way of spelling the “th” sound: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eth

A number of linguistic buffs want to bring it back to the modern English alphabet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] greybeard@lemmy.one 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A møøse once bit my sister.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Oaksey@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

True but would you prefer weak enforcement or strong enforcement?
Strong enforcement would likely involve the government having better records of your browsing habits.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

My government already knows all of my kinks, I include a list of all the porn I watched each year with my tax return. They don't ask for that, but I provide it anyway.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 37 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Enforcing it is virtually impossible.

[–] MoonlightFox@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago (3 children)

You are correct, but i'd like to expand a bit on how it could be solved.

It requires that all major social networks use BankID for all traffic from Norway.

Bypassing it would require a VPN, which is a simple hurdle.

But the major win here is that parents will enforce this. Parents can point to this law and say that they have to be old enough. As long as enough parents enforce this law and the VPN requirement is there, then it will probably be effective enough

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 16 points 1 month ago (5 children)

So you need a BankID to open an account on the covered platforms? That seems like a privacy nightmare.

[–] MoonlightFox@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (25 children)

Everyone in Norway has one, well like 99,99% or something. It is a requirement for banking.

It is used for all banking services in Norway. When you get your own bank account at 13 or something you also get BankID.

load more comments (25 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] GenXLiberal@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

I’m not Norwegian or in Norway and I’m definitely doing this - my kids know of the problems of social networking (including the latest TikTok court docs and what the execs say.)

Some friends say that’s over the top; I just say it is responsible, involved parenting. I value their mental health.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago

And a 14 year old kid using a VPN is probably not the target audience for a lot of the worst abuse.

Not saying it won't happen, but a drastic reduction is better than none.

[–] TriflingToad@lemmy.world 8 points 4 weeks ago

+1, where I live they made phones during school hours illegal. Literally NOTHING changed it's just that if they want to they can get people in trouble.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Huh? So...only children get to use social media...?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You may use it only until you are 15. Alternately, you may choose any 15-year window in your life. Choose wisely.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cy_narrator@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 1 month ago (6 children)

How do they define what a social media is?

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 month ago (10 children)

And most importantly: How would they enforce that? Kids have been lying about their ages since the dawn of internet.

[–] fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't think they really need to.

Laws are often just an acknowledgement of a society's expectation.

"We've all decided that kids under 15 using social isn't great."

The fact that this law exists makes it infinitely b easier for parents to establish and maintain rules in their household, because peer pressure is minimised.

Yes, some kids will still use social before they're 15. Perhaps most kids. However, I think harmfully excessive use will be minimised.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 month ago

The enforcing part is where this is likely to get shitty. Once they establish this as a law they maybe will try and sue companies that don't provide an age check on their websites. Now if that is possible I am not sure, seeing as many of those are having HQs in Ireland or Netherlands due to tax reasons.

But if that is successful it would mean they actually have to check everyone's age by some means, which means collecting IDs. Which definitely is bad news for users, we all know that data won't be securely stored or deleted.

Not sure how else this could go down.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Probably networks where users post personal data in conjunction with chat features. Obviously, Wikipedia is not social media in this regard and neither is a mailing list.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 weeks ago

Get off my Lemmy kids

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 11 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Governmental overreach. Good luck trying to enforce this shit.

Social media isn't bad inherently. Addictive algorithms, violation of user privacy, etc. is bad.

Kids should be taught how to make use of social media for good. I was bullied quite a lot as a kid. Social media is what kinda brought me out of it.

Social media told 13 year old me, that it is alright to be gay. Social media is what made me interested in politics. A huge part of who I am today is because of the nice people I met online. Fuck the government for trying to take it away from others like me.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Social media isn’t bad inherently. Addictive algorithms, violation of user privacy, etc. is bad.

Cigarettes aren't bad for you. It's just the burning tar and the nicotine.

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But social media don't have to burn tar. They chose to because this way they can get more money, but it's not an inherent part of the system, it's an exploitation of it for profit, and can be separated

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Chozo@fedia.io 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

While all of that may be true, it doesn't necessarily negate the adverse affects social media can also have on young people.

I think you got lucky and found a community that accepted and welcomed you. But a lot of kids aren't as fortunate, and their experiences with social media are a lot more sinister. Children are more exposed to predators and harassment now than ever before.

I dunno that a full "ban until ___ years old" policy is the cure, either. But it's a start.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Sad to see people here supporting the same kinds of policies that are diametrically opposed to privacy on the internet.

Parental control softwares are always parents failing to take the time to properly educate themselves and their children to the internet, as well as trust issue towards their children, which is bad parenting since it leads children into lying to them and finding alternatives as well as feeling seen "as a child", bad for teens...

Moreover those softwares are, as I said earlier nearly malwares

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hogmomma@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Don't stop at social media. Put that same limit on religion, too.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If anything, it would be far better to ban people above a certain age from social media. I’ve seen far more older people get sucked in by online misinformation and become extreme conspiracy theorists than kids.

[–] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 20 points 1 month ago (14 children)

It's not the government's job to tell adults to not partake in self-harm. Kids don't know better.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›