Create accountLogin

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Not available on handmade.social.
handmade.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
handmade.social is for all handmade artisans to create accounts for their Etsy and other handmade business shops.

Administered by:

Server stats:

35
active users

handmade.social: AboutProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.3.7

#socialmediaban

0 posts0 participants0 posts today
Replied in thread
Public
Drop Bear

It looks like the legislation will harm us all @luciedigitalni
abc.net.au/news/2024-11-30/soc

"The ink is still drying on section 63DB of the bill — an addition specifying that social media companies can't insist on ID as the only means of age assurance.

That eleventh-hour change was designed to safeguard our privacy but may well have triggered the countdown to a somewhat unsettling game of Would You Rather for about 20 million Australian social media users: hand over your ID or your facial data if you want to use the platforms.

Previously, providing ID had seemed the most likely method, given it's still the only ironclad way to verify a person's age.

Now, platforms will have to give us at least one other option, and biometric data is the next most likely candidate — specifically facial estimation technology, which guesses your age based on your appearance."

#AusPol
#SocialMediaBan
#privacy

ABC News · Hand over your ID or your facial data? The would-you-rather buried in the teen social media banBy Ange Lavoipierre
Public *
🐜🦅

I see a little discussion on here about Australia's recently legislated 'social media ban' for young people under 16. What is perhaps missing [esp for non-Australian readers] is some of the context.

This legislation comes out of a campaign by Murdoch/News Corp newspapers, entitled 'Let them be kids'. Irony must be dead, given that those same papers were likewise the driving force behind the 'adult crime, adult time' regime of by the recently elected conservative government in Queensland. And these same papers have been relentless in diminishing the risks of climate change and in undermining any attempts to address housing affordability. In fact, on any issue which would actually help kids and promote a positive future for young people, News Corp is defiantly on the wrong side of history.

These campaigns don't come from nowhere. So why the animosity towards social media from News Corp? My hypothesis (not especially deep, but I haven't seen it laid out explicitly): the fact that Facebook, in particular, decided in early 2024 to stop paying legacy news media under the 'News Media Bargaining Code' (this provided a framework for significant payments from social media companies to legacy media companies when content from legacy media is shared – and monetised – on social media platforms). This decision doubtless dammed a significant revenue stream for News Corp.

theconversation.com/facebook-w

Sure enough, a month or two after Facebook stops paying News Corp, the latter commences a vociferous campaign against the former. Kids here are collateral damage in the real campaign: News Corp's efforts to use their legislative influence to hamper the prospects of their rivals for increasingly scarce advertising dollars. Doubtless News Corp is likewise satisfied that their campaign has also impaired the ability of young people to connect and organise about issues they really care about. So a win-win-win for Murdoch: handicap a competitor, indulge in some virtue signalling, and punch down against 'uppity kids' who have the temerity to question the old white men who are the primary readers of News Corp titles.

The only puzzling thing is why Labor has decided to side with News Corp – it's not like aping the conservatives in their power brown-nosing of Murdoch will actually win them any friends or votes in the upcoming election. But I guess that's just my age showing: thinking that Labor under Albanese has anything much to do with the Labor party of Whitlam and Keating.

The ConversationFacebook won’t keep paying Australian media outlets for their content. Are we about to get another news ban?The news page on Facebook will go, and with it, the flow of money to some Australian media outlets. But will the news content disappear too?
#socialMediaBan#auspol
Public
🌿 (buffy)² 🌿 :they_them:

I've just published "Underage, Underserved: Growing Up in a World That Keeps Logging youth Out" an 8-page zine that dives into the challenges of age-based social media bans in Australia and why this sort of legislation doesn't make things better for young people (or adults). 💻📖

You can download it or buy it from my Ko-Fi today!

💾 Digital copy: ko-fi.com/s/32c94a0d54
📚 Physical copy: ko-fi.com/s/5fc07775b8

#zine#DigitalRights#SocialMediaBan
Public
Flipboard Tech Desk

Australia has passed a social media ban for children under 16. It attempts to address the impact of social media use on children's health, and applies to X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and Reddit, but not YouTube.

"The platforms, which bear sole responsibility for enforcement, have one year to figure out how to implement the age limit, which is the highest set by any country. If there are systemic failures to keep children from having accounts, the platforms are liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million)," @NBCNews reports.

Here's more.

flip.it/U4Nlkb

NBC News · Australia passes landmark social media ban for children under 16By Peter Guo
#SocialMedia#SocialMediaBan#Tech
Continued thread
Public
Merospit

That weird feeling when you have agreed with both the Institute of Public Affairs and Senator Matt Canavan on the same issue for the first time:

"1.2 The public first saw the legislation to ban children under 16 from social media last Thursday, submissions closed on Friday, a public hearing was held on Monday and the committee's report is due on Tuesday. The bill is likely to be voted on by the end of this sitting week. That will mean that a bill that introduces a complex regulation of modern and evolving technologies will be subject to less than one week of public scrutiny."

#auspol#socialmediaban
Public
Merospit

Social Media Ban Senate committee trying to regain some relevance by emphasising that they didn't publish (or likely read) almost all of the 15000+ submissions by stating they only published 107 submissions.

"The committee published 107 submissions from organisations and individuals, which are listed in Appendix 1 and available on the committee's website."

web.archive.org/web/2024112607

web.archive.orgWayback Machine
#auspol#socialmediaban
Public
Chiel G, Nevele

"Nobody does social media legislation better than me, folks. I’ve written it, it’s tremendous, absolutely the best. All the world leaders, every single one of them, are calling, applauding, saying, 'Albo, you’ve done an incredible job.' They can’t believe it. It’s a total game-changer!"

#auspol #socialmedia #socialmediaban

theguardian.com/australia-news

The Guardian · Australian PM says world leaders 'applauding' social media legislation – videoBy Guardian staff reporter
Public
itgrrl :donor:

I hadn’t seen this before - digitalchild.org.au/research/p

thanks to @snurb for linking to it - aoir.social/@snurb/11330870604

disclosure: I have a psychological aversion (trauma response, really) to the use of “manifesto” in just about any context, but I pushed on regardless 😆

In the hopes that the Digital Child folks might be monitoring mentions in the fediverse 🤞 I’m dropping some questions about their approach here (I’ll drop a link into their mentions over on the bad site too 🙃)

1. I didn’t see any suggestions of how to manage the transition from younger children using the “Children’s Internet” to using the full internet as children get older. Is this covered and I just missed it?

2. Related: is there consideration of how to keep the Children’s Internet relevant to teenagers, who are notoriously averse to continuing to associate with things they perceive as “too young” or “too uncool” for them? Or is it expected that they will self-select to “age out” from the curated garden?

3. I appreciate that this specifically calls out Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander children as being at risk of exclusion and attempting to address this. But I didn’t see a single mention across either the manifesto or the report of #LGBTIQ+ children as a marginalised group whose experience also needed to be addressed. My fear about the approach as laid out is that it could (absolutely will) become weaponised as a way to “sanitise” the content that children & young people see. LGBTIQ+ content has almost always been sought by conservative interest groups to be censored or restricted as being “sexualised” content when it’s actually just content relevant to LGBTIQ+ folk (including kids & teenagers). If the manifesto (*twitch* 😜) doesn’t bake in access to content that some parents may not approve of but some children desperately need, then… “the purpose is a system is what it does”. 😕 And if the purpose of the children’s Internet is to provide a safer space for exploration & discovery, if the content just isn’t there then kids will of course seek it out elsewhere.

#AusPol
#SocialMediaBan
#ChildrensInternet
#NationalAgeVerificationSystem

Digital ChildManifesto for a Better Children's Internet - Digital Child
SearchLive feeds
About