3 ms·
I haven't read the bill, but my first thought is that there's always going to be some threat to children, so any time you want to play pork barrel politics, you
by jstarfish 3y ago
I haven't read the bill, but my first thought is that there's always going to be some threat to children, so any time you want to play pork barrel politics, you can trot out some nebulous child-safety bill and append riders to that.
Second thought is that this isn't about private interests (though it's possible). Big Tech moves and grows faster than the government. Arbitrary requirements are one way to papercut a larger entity into submission, like FOSTA/SESTA or 2257-- we'll give ourselves a way to take you down for something.
Case in point:
> The bill holds platforms liable if their designs and services do not “prevent and mitigate” a list of societal ills: anxiety, depression, eating disorders, substance use disorders, physical violence, online bullying and harassment, sexual exploitation and abuse, and suicidal behaviors. Additionally, platforms would be responsible for patterns of use that indicate or encourage addiction-like behaviors.
Platforms would be responsible for preventing and mitigating anxiety. Platforms are prohibited from doing anything to incentivize repeat business. This is Obscenity 2.0.
- strogonoff 3y agoIf large platforms were required to interoperate and provide complete open APIs, that would break down their network effect lock-in and ad-based double-sided business model and put us users in power to vote with our feet and wallets to make them do all those things we value. That’s what we should be fighting for: to let market forces do their job properly. However, existing Big Social would rather prefer that law regulated everything about them—it increases the barrier to entry for honest competitors while Facebooks of this world have enough people and money to throw at those things.
- commoner 3y agoThe worst part of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is the requirement that websites "prevent and mitigate" anxiety and depression in users and viewers under 18 years of age. Here is the exact text from the bill's Section 3(a)(1) which prescribes this restriction: > SEC. 3. Duty of care. >> (a) Prevention of harm to minors.—A covered platform shall act in the best interests of a user that the platform knows or reasonably should know is a minor by taking reasonable measures in its design and operation of products and services to prevent and mitigate the following: >>> (1) Consistent with evidence-informed medical information, the following mental health disorders: anxiety, depression, eating disorders, substance use disorders, and suicidal behaviors. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/1409/text#id114b8ce2-d765-4e5c-bc33-1a5073a1e5eb https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/140... There are many types of content that can trigger anxiety or depression that should not be censored for people under 18, such as political speech and negative/distressing news. (The implications this bill has on political speech and news reporting also raise questions about whether it is constitutional.) People under 18 have a right to be informed just as adults do, even if they don't have the ability to vote to protect that right for themselves. If you are in the United States, please call your senator and representatives to reject this draconian bill: https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member