HN

Comments (133)

• Menu

  triceratops
  I'm going to restate my proposed age verification system here. I've posted it several times as a comment on this website. It works as follows:1. A private company, let's call it AgeVerify, issues scratch-off cards with unique tokens on them. They are basically like gift cards.2. AgeVerify's scratch-off cards are sold exclusively in IRL stores. Preferably liquor stores, adult stores, and/or tobacco/vape shops. Places that are licensed and check ID.3. Anyone who wants to verify their age online can purchase a token at a store. The store must only demand ID if the buyer appears to be a minor (similar to alcohol or tobacco purchases). The store must never store the ID in any form whatsoever.4. Giving or selling these tokens to a minor is a criminal offense. If a store does it, they lose their liquor or tobacco license. Treat it just like giving a minor alcohol or tobacco.4a. Run public service announcement campaigns to communicate that giving an AgeVerify token to a child is like handing them a cigarette. There should be a clear social taboo associated with the legal ban.5. The buyer of the AgeVerify token enters it into their account on whatever social media or adult website they want to use. The website validates the code with AgeVerify.6. Once validated, the code is good for 1 year (or 6 months or 3 months, adjust based on how stringent you want to make it) - then it expires and a new one must be purchased.7. A separate token is required for each website/each account.8. The website is responsible for enforcing no account sharing.No identifying information is stored anywhere. Kids find it very hard to access age-restricted materials online, just like the vast majority of kids don't easily have access to alcohol or cigarettes.
• Menu

  DalasNoin
  Many of these "social" media websites increasingly just fling AI-generated disturbing videos at people. I am sure we could build a web that is actually pleasant to use for kids, but we are not building it. youtube for example: https://x.com/kimmonismus/status/2006013682472669589
• Menu

  egorfine
  I'm pretty sure it is going to pass.Too much of a coordinated efforts between western countries, thus it cannot fail. The decisions have been made and your voice pretty much doesn't matter.
• Menu

  astrobe_
  The question is how this is implemented, in particular age verification.It's usual to say that MPs are old people that don't understand current technologies, but in law preparation committees they appear to be well aware; in particular, they mentioned a "double-anonymity" system where the site requesting your age wouldn't know your name, and the entity serving age requests wouldn't know which site it is for. They are also aware that people walk-around age verification checks with e.g. fake ID cards, possibly AI generated.I'm not sure if it is actually doable reliabily, and I'm not sure either that the MPs that will have to vote the law will know the topic as well as the MPs participating in these committees.I would personally consider other options like a one-button admin config for computers/smartphones/tablets that restricts access according to age (6-14, 15-18) and requiring online service providers to announce their "rating" in HTTP headers. Hackers will certainly object that young hackers could bypass this, but like copy-protection, the mission can be considered complete when the vast majority of people are prevented from doing what they should not do.Alternatively one could consider the creation of a top-level domain with a "code of content" (which could include things like "chat control") enforced by controlling entity. Then again, an OS-level account config button could restrict all Internet accesses to this domain.Perhaps an national agency could simply grant a "child safe" label to operating systems that comply to this.This type of solutions would I think also be useful in schools (e.g. school-provided devices), although they are also talking about severely limiting screen-time at school.For the french speakers, see:[1] https://videos.assemblee-nationale.fr/video.17950525_6942684...[2] https://videos.assemblee-nationale.fr/video.17952051_6942761...
• Menu

  herunan
  This is just cop out legislation. I wanna see laws targeting addictive design systems and harmful content. Social media is only part of the problem.There’s so much that falls out of the social media definition. And regardless, kids are not stupid… VPNs, proxies, etc are easy to circumvent with.
• Menu

  AshamedCaptain
  Devil's advocate: what is the difference between "social media" and a website very much like this one? When can I look forward to having to give a DNA test to read HN?
• bbbhltz
  I'm one of the weirdos that should be on board with this, but I'm against it. This will do harm to marginalized youth and push younger people to lie and find ways around the ban.Plus, we saw that in Australia that the lobby behind the ban was in fact an ad agency that makes ads for gambling apps.Here is France, the ban is probably just a way to avoid legislation against companies selling crap that isn't for kids like vape pens and sports gambling apps.
• Menu

  Insanity
  Good, social media should be considered a harmful substance. Even for adults it’s probably a bad thing.
• Menu

  hollow-moe
  > If a child is in a Formula One car and they turn on the engine, I don’t want them to win the race, I just want them to get out of the car. I want them to learn the highway code first, and to ensure the car works, and to teach them to drive in a different car.Yet computer education in France has been severely lacking for so long. From middle school to even universities (except the courses computer focused obviously) people aren't taught correctly. Teachers themselves are lost to computers and lectures are bad.The goal is obviously to have tech illiterate people knowing just enough to use computers for the job but not worrying about the digital autoristarism currently being deployed.
• anon
  undefined
• Menu

  everfrustrated
  A ban on social media for children is a different way of saying ID Verification for the entire population.They are implicitly the same thing.You can't exclude children without first verifying _everyone_ and from there excluding people who match age < approved. This is basic logic.If you were a cynical person you could imagine this is actually politicians wanting to bring in an ID law and using "think of the children" as the social justification for it.If you're a conspiracy theorist you'd wonder why Apple and Google have now added the ability to upload and link your passport and other real id into their respective app wallets. How long before your phones browser is digitally signing all your social media posts with your ID...
• aucisson_masque
  I remember when I was a kid I listened to radio until very late in to the night.Unless they want to remove all of technology from 10pm to 8am, this bill is going to be ridiculous. Teenager and kid will always find better things to do than sleep.
• like_any_other
  Ban for children, and mandatory deanonymiziation [1] for everyone else.[1] At best with a "trust us we won't tattle" "privacy" architecture.
• RickJWagner
  Good for France!I wish my country (USA) would adapt similar laws.
• meroes
  More!
• Menu

  Simulacra
  This is such a fools errand, there will always be services popping up faster than regulators can ban them. This won't stop a lot of the kids. So wasteful.
• Menu

  snowpid
  I am convinced that the current world wide rise of (right wing ) populist movements is mainly caused by social media. By regulating like this my hope is we can reduce their spread.
• nephihaha
  What a coincidence.
• brewcejener
  HN readers won't be able to find online partners if this accelerates.
• ta9000
  The trade war continues. We’ve known these shitty platforms were polluting kids for at least a decade.