| ▲ | retired 5 hours ago |
| Age verification on Australian social media has loopholes. Underage influencers use an agency to manage their social media for them. So anyone with enough followers or money can continue using social media under the age of 16. If you are going to implement age controls, you should implement a ban on underage influencers as well. |
|
| ▲ | Barbing 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| How could one protect the, call it one in 1 million… the speech of the (young) Greta Thunbergs, for example? I bet there is a 15 year-old much smarter than me making political videos and I wouldn’t necessarily want them to be forced to stop. What if they’re on my “team”! ;) (I kid) Recalling how we had lots of political debates in high school: if some of those kids made videos and got really popular, and the law made them stop, they would have been incentivized to vote $responsibleParty out. (Socials bad for kids though maybe they could selfhost their monologues instead) |
| |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | mystraline 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I believe every government disenfranchises young people because they are young. Its not about intelligence. Else a whole lot of over-age-of-majority wouldn't pass either. Theres also no old-age cutoff, when their mental faculties significantly decline. Yeah, the voting majority keeps 'under age' from voting. But at least in the USA, we have children as young as 11 being tried as adults but with none of the benefits. | | |
| ▲ | Barbing 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | You’re right that it shouldn’t be about intelligence! Overall definitely unfair. — After posting, I questioned whether political speech is special. Like should fifteen-year-olds who love film be able to make videos about them and get lots of followers… but I couldn’t be thought police. So maybe- The platform just has to be designed non-addictively. Is this accurate?: In reality, Facebook was so powerful the regulators could never make them stop at any turn. Now that they finally got sued big time, we finally educated ourselves enough as constituents to raise enough of a stink to trigger straight up bans. (educated ourselves, or politicians legislate based how bad headlines are, or it was so egregious it genuinely ticked them off… …) |
|
|
|
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | everdrive 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >Underage influencers Anyone who has hone so far as to become an influencer is already a lost cause. No law could save them. |
|
| ▲ | ilovecake1984 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That’s not really a loophole though. We have child actors in Harry Potter. |
| |
|
| ▲ | logicchains 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| >If you are going to implement age controls, you should implement a ban on underage influencers as well. That just makes it even worse, why deprive the younger generation of one of the few remaining methods they have to make a decent income? We should be encouraging youth entrepreneurship, not making them spend even longer in classrooms learning things that LLMs will do better than them. |
| |
| ▲ | jrajav 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is almost verbatim the same argument that people make in support of allowing child labor in factories. Children do not need, nor are they entitled to, any kind of "freedom" to work for a living. | |
| ▲ | retired 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | People under the age of 16 shouldn't be worried about "making a decent income". They should focus on school. In the weekends they can stock shelves, deliver pizza, deliver newspapers, wash dishes, babysitting, feed animals or other typical jobs for children in the age range of 12 to 16. | | |
| ▲ | hackinthebochs 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | >They should focus on school. Why? Presumably so they can go to college and get a high paying job that may not exist in 10 years? The direction we give kids coming up always seems to lag behind reality by 10 or 20 years. Perhaps we shouldn't stand in the way of the new generation figuring things out for themselves in this brave new world. The old playbooks to a solid middle class life are increasingly outdated. | | |
| ▲ | array_key_first 43 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > Why? Presumably so they can go to college and get a high paying job that may not exist in 10 years? Also so they don't end up stupid and useless like a potted plant. People with too little education are easy to manipulate and dim. They're perfect fodder for the propaganda machines. It would be nice if we could just let kids loose like wild animals and they'd, somehow, figure everything out. But no, we actually have to try. Otherwise they end up illiterate and eating so much candy they throw up. Because they're kids. |
|
| |
| ▲ | array_key_first an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Less education, more peddling products on Instagram is... certainly an opinion that exists. | |
| ▲ | connoronthejob 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Since when did being an influencer become 'one of the few remaining methods' to make a decent income? | | |
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't think it truly is, but I do think that the younger generations think it is. My nieces and nephews really don't know what they are going to do in their futures because so much is uncertain right now. If it feels like a longshot to expect normal 9-5 office jobs to be around in 5 years, and it's also a longshot being an influencer, then why not go for the influencer thing? |
|
|
