4 ms·

Sometimes even things that are good for Meta are good for the rest of us. This law, and the one in California, mean that liability is disclaimed as long as the

Sometimes even things that are good for Meta are good for the rest of us. This law, and the one in California, mean that liability is disclaimed as long as the parent selects an age above 18 for the child. It's like a section 230 for age protection. Meta supports this because they won't be liable for wrong age inputs, and we should also support this because it doesn't verify age in any other way.

phendrenad2 7mo ago
We should support something that does the minimum to accomplish the goal. As luck would have it, we don't need to do anything because parental controls already exist, and apps like YouTube already have a "kid mode". But for some reason, people are very attached to the idea of getting that number. Your age. It isn't enough to have a boolean isAdult. Oh no, they want to know how old you are, and they want that number to follow tou everywhere you go. View a site on your PC and then load it in incognito to create an account and comment? Oh look, this person we've identified as pockauppet age 99 or whatever viewed the page, then someone registered aged 99 and commented on that same page. This is a data goldmine. But I guess we're not against sharing data anymore.
- pocksuppet 7mo ago
  Have you used parental controls? They're complete and utter shit. You cut your child off from almost all of the internet, or you may as well not have any controls at all.
  - phendrenad2 7mo ago
    Have you? What makes you think they can't be improved? And what do you think will happen when people set the age in this new system?
    - pocksuppet 7mo ago
      App developers don't want to comply with them - that's one reason. Now the law says app developers have to follow parental controls, and are liable for ignoring parental controls. That's a sensible law.
      - phendrenad2 7mo ago
        I'll concede that perhaps a law is needed to make apps comply with parental controls. So again, what does that have anything to do with THIS law which mandates something completely different??

phendrenad2 7mo ago

We should support something that does the minimum to accomplish the goal. As luck would have it, we don't need to do anything because parental controls already exist, and apps like YouTube already have a "kid mode". But for some reason, people are very attached to the idea of getting that number. Your age. It isn't enough to have a boolean isAdult. Oh no, they want to know how old you are, and they want that number to follow tou everywhere you go. View a site on your PC and then load it in incognito to create an account and comment? Oh look, this person we've identified as pockauppet age 99 or whatever viewed the page, then someone registered aged 99 and commented on that same page. This is a data goldmine. But I guess we're not against sharing data anymore.

pocksuppet 7mo ago
Have you used parental controls? They're complete and utter shit. You cut your child off from almost all of the internet, or you may as well not have any controls at all.
- phendrenad2 7mo ago
  Have you? What makes you think they can't be improved? And what do you think will happen when people set the age in this new system?
  - pocksuppet 7mo ago
    App developers don't want to comply with them - that's one reason. Now the law says app developers have to follow parental controls, and are liable for ignoring parental controls. That's a sensible law.
    - phendrenad2 7mo ago
      I'll concede that perhaps a law is needed to make apps comply with parental controls. So again, what does that have anything to do with THIS law which mandates something completely different??