5 ms·

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=LEGISLATION;id=legislation%2Fbills%2Fr7284_aspassed%2F0001;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fbills%

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=LEGISLATION;id=legislation%2Fbills%2Fr7284_aspassed%2F0001;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fbills%2Fr7284_aspassed%2F0000%22 https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.... Read the legislation. Ask yourself if it's better for a country's government or a foreign set of social media companies to control what young people see. One has a profit motive above all else. One can be at least voted for or against.

baobun 1y ago
Parents seem like the appropriate authority for minors? Neither should control adults.
- frollogaston 1y ago
  These laws do seem in line with the way these countries operate, with heavier restrictions on speech and lifestyle. I prefer living in America, but that way might not work for every country, and I can see why they do this.
Pooge 1y ago
One has a profit motive influenced by legislation/regulation put in place by the other, which the latter seems to have no interest of doing for the last 20 years.
southernplaces7 1y ago
Oh my god, the information and social media might be "foreign"!! that's obviously cause for suspicion and prohibition. Do you perhaps live in some brainless mid-20th century authoritarian fantasy of social dangers? If you think X domestic legislation doesn't come with its own baggage of profit motives, hidden agendas and attempts at controlling narratives for young people, you're in for a rude awakening if you dig a bit deeper. That aside, i'd rather parents being the ones who decide what minors see instead of some hackneyed government censorship program rammed through by a plethora of boogeymen and possibly (very likely) later used to track and censor adult access to information choices. Laws like these and their supporters can both fuck off. It's the same old story from going back centuries, nationalist, religious or generally moralizing bullshit about the supposed dangers of some nefarious influence being used to restrict what I decide to read, watch or think about.

baobun 1y ago

Parents seem like the appropriate authority for minors? Neither should control adults.

frollogaston 1y ago
These laws do seem in line with the way these countries operate, with heavier restrictions on speech and lifestyle. I prefer living in America, but that way might not work for every country, and I can see why they do this.

Pooge 1y ago

One has a profit motive influenced by legislation/regulation put in place by the other, which the latter seems to have no interest of doing for the last 20 years.

southernplaces7 1y ago

Oh my god, the information and social media might be "foreign"!! that's obviously cause for suspicion and prohibition. Do you perhaps live in some brainless mid-20th century authoritarian fantasy of social dangers? If you think X domestic legislation doesn't come with its own baggage of profit motives, hidden agendas and attempts at controlling narratives for young people, you're in for a rude awakening if you dig a bit deeper. That aside, i'd rather parents being the ones who decide what minors see instead of some hackneyed government censorship program rammed through by a plethora of boogeymen and possibly (very likely) later used to track and censor adult access to information choices. Laws like these and their supporters can both fuck off. It's the same old story from going back centuries, nationalist, religious or generally moralizing bullshit about the supposed dangers of some nefarious influence being used to restrict what I decide to read, watch or think about.