Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)N
Posts
14
Comments
2588
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • It should be for the parents to let their children use social media or not

    The issue is, parents who do not want to let their children use social media have really lost the battle because every other kid is on social media. So if even if a parent stands their ground on a strict "no social" policy, their kid is an outcast.

    With this law, even though some kids will still be on social, parents are empowered to hold the line.

  • That's not how the law is structured.

    Sites are required to implement reasonable measures.

    If kids are being evaluated as 18, with no additional checks, that's not reasonable and they're risking the penalties.

    We're going to find out whether the regulator has much appetite to issue those penalties, but we will see I guess.

  • Ooh, and social credit! Maybe you'll need to earn social credit which you'll require to access some websites, with some like social media only being provided to people with a high enough social credit score! /s

  • Are you 12?

  • On the contrary.

    Loads of new platforms have sprung up with are not listed amongst those required to implement age verification.

    Yes, any which become successful will be required to implement age verification but... they will already be successful.

  • I'm genuinely curious who you think will be blocked next?

  • This is a wildly popular measure in Australia.

  • I haven't experienced what I would describe as "trauma" but I definitely feel like I've become more fragile as I've gone through life.

  • Mine sells diazepam but only if I have a prescription.

  • I don't care?

  • I'm kind of astonished that you don't seem to be able to discern between laws, rights, and societal expectations. There's nuance here that seems to be completely lost on you.

    You're correct that recording people in public is legal. However, while most people don't mind being recorded for surveillance / security purposes, they sure as fuck do mind being recorded as content for someone's tiktok following.

    Like any anti-social behavior, most people might just ignore you, some people will tell you to knock it off, but sooner or later you'll encounter someone who doesn't give a fuck and they'll retaliate, perhaps violently. This shouldn't be surprising.

    Is it "right" or lawful to assault someone who is recording you? Of course not, but it's a manifestation for society's distaste for this shit.

  • Saying someone's opinion is a "bad take" is just another "everyone's on my side" argument.

  • I'm merely pointing out that saying someone's opinion is a bad take is meaningless. "I disagree with your opinion".

  • Correct.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Wow I hadn't actually realised this had changed, but of course it has.

    I remember watching "beyond 2000" as an 80s kid. A TV show about the inventions and stuff, what life would be like, it was so amazing.

    Now we all know the future will just be more oppressive than it is now.

  • lemmy.dbzer0.com now protected by Haphash Proof-of-Work [GenAI] [Instance]

    Jump
  • That would be an unethical waste of power for legit users

  • Apparently, it's a "bad take" I share with a great many people.

    It's true that I have no "expectation of privacy in public", but I do have an expectation not to be a prop in someone's content production hustle. If you can't tell the difference I'm not really sure I can help you.

  • That's how I understand horseshoe theory - they share some similar views for vastly different reasons.

    I think "indistinguishable" might refer to some other phrase.

  • Nah thats bullshit.

    Intent is important. Being surveilled when in public doesn't mean that its appropriate to record people on your personal device for your own use. Thats particularly true if you intend to publish that footage.

    If some vapid insta bimbo was making an annoying noise, and recording people on her phone to get their response, and a guy broke her phone, I would absolutely applaud that.

    Im aware that the law does not prohibit this behaviour, but the law ever was a poor indicator of "appropriate" behaviour.