12 ms·
H.B.3 only prohibits these minors holding accounts on social media. They can still browse, as can anyone without an account and age verification. You'd be able
by oliwarner 3y ago
H.B.3 only prohibits these minors holding accounts on social media. They can still browse, as can anyone without an account and age verification. You'd be able to view a business's information, watch videos, etc etc etc, just not create your own.
It also has conditions for which sites are affected by this law. The site has to have doomscroll and already be popular with kids. Google Maps isn't what they're targeting.
Honestly, mixed feelings. I'm in no rush to show Zuck my passport but the flagrant grooming comments on every kid's TikTok account is enough to show there's a significant problem, even if this isn't the right answer.
- jiayo 3y agoHow many social media sites allow you to do anything without an account? Twitter used to be wide open but X competely locked down. Instagram lets you click 2 things and then the paywall pops up. I'm not sure about Facebook but it isn't much better.
- appplication 3y agoWithout speaking to merits, the entire point of this law is to reduce usage by minors. So being able to do less without an account is a feature through this lens.
- pests 3y agoThe question was about merits though, you can't just ignore the question. How do teenagers find and discover businesses when they are locked behind a sign up wall for social media?
- wpasc 3y agoThis is an unfair parallel, but it's like worrying about businesses who advertise on pornographic sites or on cigarette boxes. Allowing visibility to businesses who advertise on a certain platform could be judged (by society, law, and voters) to be outweighed by the need to restrict youth access to social media. There is a variety of precedent in society and law in restricting youth access to something that is otherwise deemed legal. Just because businesses advertise on social media (in my opinion), the decision to restrict access should not be altered by that advertising strategy.
- pests 3y agoThey don't advertise on FB, they host their main web presence on FB. That's like saying you go to Pornhub to buy Manscaped Hair Trimmers. You don't. They _advertise_ on PH, but that's not where you buy them at. Why is everyone replying to me about ads? Who said anything about ads?
- iamacyborg 3y ago> How do teenagers find and discover businesses when they are locked behind a sign up wall for social media? Why is this even a problem? Oh no, businesses can’t target advertising directly at children?
- pests 3y agoWho said anything about advertising? This is about businesses using Facebook as their main website. Where do ads come in? Are teenagers not real people or something? They don't buy things or shop?
- iamacyborg 3y agoKids can “find businesses” the way they always have
- pests 3y agoLike, with ads? That you were so against above. What's wrong with them going to a businesses online presence?
- jandrese 3y agoIt will be interesting for businesses like restaurants that don't have paper menus but have you scan a code that opens an IG with their menu in an album. Frankly, I applaud the state for eliminating this use case.
- goykasi 3y agoTwitter required a login long before the rename or Elon owned it. He actually removed that restriction for a while before reenabling it. And with some simple div removal, IG doesnt require a login to view content. This is true about a lot of the paywalled sites.
- kennywinker 3y agoThat doesn't sound true to me... Idk specific policies, but my experience was that I was never logged in to twitter on my desktop and I was never login-walled out until recently under elon. edit: https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/30/tech/twitter-public-access-restricted/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/30/tech/twitter-public-access-re... > People without a Twitter account or who weren’t logged in used to be able to scroll the platform’s homepage and view public accounts and tweets. But as of this week, when such a user opens the platform they are met with a screen prompting them to sign up or sign in to Twitter.
- goykasi 3y agoIve never had a twitter account. And I was definitely not able to view most content during the pandemic. from 2021: https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/pa6dra/twitter_starts_to_require_login_to_view_tweets/ https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/pa6dra/twitter... and from 2022: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30615371 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30615371
- somethoughts 3y agoA plus of this law would be if this would force social media sites to stop locking down read access behind a sign up wall. I think the barrier to entry with creating a new account on each site right now is low when no ID is required - so social media sites lock everything down. With the new friction of requiring ID, it could be harder to get users to create accounts so locking down everything won't make sense from a viewership access perspective.
- vundercind 3y agoI don’t have a Facebook account, but browse business Facebook pages without trouble pretty often.
- dangus 3y agoWhat I’m really unclear about is whether providers are required to use an actual ID to age verify. Does anyone know? The bill summary on the Florida senate webpage says: > Such commercial entities must verify, using either an anonymous or standard age verification method, that the age of a person attempting to access the material harmful to minors satisfies the bill’s age requirements. It sounds to me like “anonymous age verification method” could just mean that the website asks how old you are? What constitutes verification here? That sentence makes it sound like they can choose to use whatever feeble method they want. At face value this law seems like political points being scored by passing a widely popular law that changes very little in practice (bumping the minimum age from 13 to 14).
- somethingreen 3y agoAnonymous verification could be something like OAuth. Government run or certified probably. You'd need to provide an ID to OAuth provider once, but the actual service requesting verification would get as little as your age and email.
- scarface_74 3y agoThe last thing we need is to force everyone to have ID to “protect the children” before I can go on to a site on the internet.
- consumer451 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_papers,_please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_papers,_please
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- oliwarner 3y agoWhich is not what anyone is calling for.
- thomastjeffery 3y agoWhat? That's literally what we are talking about!
- oliwarner 3y agoNo, we're talking about stopping children having social media accounts.
- jonathankoren 3y agoAnd how do you know they're not a child? Bars do it by having you show an id. Online pot dispensaries do it by having you upload an id. Texas expects porn sites to do it by having you upload an id. How does Florida expect a site to do it? This is a legitimate question that I want the answer to. Presumably "check this box" isn't going to cut it. So if it's not the most common way to enforce an actual legal restriction, then what is it?
- 3y ago
- bananapub 3y ago> You'd be able to view a business's information, watch videos, etc etc etc, just not create your own. so...everyone - that Facebook or whatever considers to be in Florida - has to provide ID to post, then?
- morkalork 3y agoThis is not true! I was looking at a hair salon and bakery recently. Both, being run by millennials, have nothing but a google maps listing and an Instagram account. But I don't have one and after looking at a few photos of cakes and hairstyles, it gives me the boot and asks me to sign in to see more! Adding mandatory government ID to that is crazy.
- rokkitmensch 3y agoAnything that contributes to funnel friction for those wreckers is a social net positive in my book.
- wannacboatmovie 3y agoThey sound like incompetent business proprietors. When did having a website become something exclusively for old people? Millennials are in their 30s and 40s.
- nicoburns 3y ago> When did having a website become something exclusively for old people? It's more that having a website never became a thing for many businesses in the first place. 30 years ago they might have had a listing in the phone book. Nowadays that kind of business might have a facebook page, or more recently an instagram account. Creating a website (even with something like wix) requires a level of skill and effort above that.
- smallerfish 3y agoThey're just being cheap. Facebook is free (and "everybody has Facebook") whereas Wix and Squarespace are $12-$15/mo for businesses.
- vundercind 3y agoFor a lot of businesses, a website receives way fewer views than any one of their top-3 social media sites. I’ve seen a lot who are still paying for a site but rarely bother to update it. All the traffic’s on Facebook.
- rstuart4133 3y ago> I'm in no rush to show Zuck my passport I agree, but I think your problem isn't Zuck, it's with passports. Government issued licences aren't fit for purpose any more. They were when all you did with your paper drivers licence is show it to the police, but now they've become a form of ID you show man+dog who gets to scrape a whole pile of into from it that can be used to track you. For example, they can follow your passport number or drivers licence to connect a series of what should look like unrelated transactions. As an example, now when a car rental company wants to know you have a valid licence they demand a copy of it. If you have an accident they use the copy to prove they verified you are licenced to drive, if you do something illegal they can hand over your ID so the police can chase you down. FIDO / WebAuthn / PassKey shows how those things can be achieved without leaking all the information on the licence. It can hand over a one time token saying you have a valid licence and signed by something that chains back to a public key held by the government. The token reveals nothing more than that to the car hire firm, but should they hand it over to the police they can decrypt it to identify you. These tokens are useless if stolen. They can't link you to other transactions and don't identify you in any way, and yet are far more secure than a bunch of unsigned pixels. In other words unlike a copy of a passport, mostly harmless.
- kevin_thibedeau 3y ago> don't identify you in any way That's a critical flaw to those in power.
- josephg 3y agoHard agree. I think making significant progress on this problem would be time consuming - but ultimately a significant win for society.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 3y agoBut current trend is websites closing up for browsing without an account, because of AI.