> these big companies need to self police

It's not possible to prevent a person (of any age) from reaching a specific website if they are determined enough. Full stop.

▲

collabs 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> It's not possible to prevent a person (of any age) from reaching a specific website if they are determined enough. Full stop.

right, and that reveals the absurdity of this "age gate", doesn't it? because I am sure giving every UK national their very own unicorn would also poll very well but that doesn't mean that's what a functional democracy should be prioritizing just because a majority of the public supports because doing so is not possible

▲

subscribed 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's because it's not about age gating, it's about identifying the internet users.

	▲	joe463369 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Is there any evidence of this? I hear it time and again with very little justification.

▲

CPLX 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s not possible to prevent these same children from getting alcohol or drugs either but we certainly don’t permit it.

	▲	collabs 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		yes and we do fine companies that sell alcohol and drugs to children. lets give everyone an incentive to report companies that allow or encourage children to use these websites. the children, the parents, bystanders, the employees and contractors of these websites, everyone should get paid from the fines these social media companies would need to pay out for every infraction. I think GBP 10k per incidence is actually pretty cheap considering the alternative is life in prison for the CEO and the board starting with cash incentives all the way to prison terms for the CEO and the board

▲

kylecazar 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Fwiw they acknowledge this and claim the goal of this regulation is to drastically increase friction, not render it impossible