3 ms·
> The law will also prohibit social media platforms from sending notifications regarding addictive feeds to minors from 12:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. without parental
by tbrownaw 2y ago
> The law will also prohibit social media platforms from sending notifications regarding addictive feeds to minors from 12:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. without parental consent.
So they'll need to verify a user's age, and possibly also relationship to another user.
That seems like it would interfere with anonymity which is necessary to be able to speak freely on contentious issues. Or will people saying heretical things just not be able to use fancy feeds or all-hours notifications?
(Or instead of political dissidents, maybe consider people who have a crazy stalker ex.)
- akersten 2y agoYeah, those cheering this on are missing the trees for the forest - laws with these kind of identity/age validation requirements are the path to normalizing deep bureaucratic integration with the internet at large, it's disheartening to see the TOTC[0] argument work so well here, but it's been proven to be Ol' Reliable especially w/r/t similar legislation targeting adult media companies. As a former child with internet access who turned out Just Fine, and a strong privacy advocate, the next decade of similarly-inspired lawmaking hurts my heart. There are some good morsels in these laws like the limits on data exchange, but the pieces relying on age, identity, and rules about the presentation of site content are extremely problematic to me. Especially the last piece - I don't see how the State telling a site how its recommendation algorithms can or can't behave doesn't run afoul of the site operator's constitutional freedom of expression in determining the display of its user-generated content. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children