3 ms·
> it's a foot in the door for demanding that websites and apps care about that age range. This has been the case for literally decades. Social media sites aren
by queenkjuul 2mo ago
> it's a foot in the door for demanding that websites and apps care about that age range.
This has been the case for literally decades. Social media sites aren't (technically) supposed to allow users under 13, and porn sites have obviously had this concern since forever.
This law does in fact make parental controls better by forcing the social media companies to change how they present content to minors.
I don't totally disagree that the impetus should be on the social media companies instead of the OS but i also genuinely don't see a problem with a voluntary adult/minor flag with a consistent API either
- JoshTriplett 2mo agoSocial sites aren't supposed to knowingly allow users under 13, but they're not required to proactively exclude them either, nor should they be. And addictive feeds are a problem for everyone, of any age.
- queenkjuul 2mo agoWhy shouldn't they have to exclude them? Cigarettes and alcohol are addictive for everyone but we require vendors to proactively exclude minors and only minors. I mean look, up to me, sure, ban Facebook entirely or whatever, but i genuinely don't get why they shouldn't be required to exclude kids if they're gonna exist?