this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
384 points (96.2% liked)

Technology

60340 readers
5461 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
384
Meta’s Moderation Modifications Mean Anti-LGBTQ Speech Is Welcome, While Pro-LGBTQ Speech Is Not (www.techdirt.com)
submitted 1 day ago by airportline@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.world
77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] donuts@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Pretty much all social media has a minimum age of 13 in their ToS. So what exactly are you suggesting? Raising it by 1 year?

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

Actually verifying it and punishing the companies if they let underaged people use it. Alcohol stores are also punished when they sell products to children.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

This is a terrible idea, and only makes it 10x easier for surveillance capitalism to track, profile, and propagandize the entire population.

This line of reasoning is basically using "won't someone think of the children" fear mongering to hand over the keys to big brother.

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

This is a terrible idea, and only makes it 10x easier for surveillance capitalism to track, profile, and propagandize the entire population.

I don't see how that follows. Can you elaborate?

[–] 31337@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

If you have to verify children's identity, you have to verify everyone's identity. This is part of KOSA. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/12/kids-online-safety-act-continues-threaten-our-rights-online-year-review-2024

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Ah, right. It's possible yes that this would make it easier for them, but my understanding of technology is that it was pretty much possible like 10 years ago to track practically everyone who isn't actively doing a countermeasures against it.

[–] donuts@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago

I personally think this would help, but there's a lot folks online who scream "free speech" when you start talking about verifying age online. And honestly, I don't know a good solution to balance it

[–] Xer0@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago

Raise it by 3. Under 16s shouldn't have access to any social media.