The “definitions” section of the bill is a lot more decent than I expected it to be.<p>Page 3 of the bill pdf:<p><a href="https://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2023/S7694A" rel="nofollow">https://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2023/S7694A</a>
This is obviously unconstitutional and it'll be shot down in the courts before it takes effect since this is their version of KOSA among other First Amendment issues.<p>Some context here: <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/2024/06/11/nys-safe-for-kids-act-a-lesson-in-how-not-to-regulate-the-internet/" rel="nofollow">https://www.techdirt.com/2024/06/11/nys-safe-for-kids-act-a-...</a>
Another case of the political use of medical terms in completely unsupported ways for political goals. There is no medical or scientific support for the use of the word "addiction" in this context. It's a meme that's become more dangerous than the problem it imagines. It's not in the DSM 5 or ICD10 and not because they haven't addressed it in committee. They have, as recently as 2020 and found no support for it. And if you say, "gambling" well, yes, that's "gambling disorder" not "gambling addiction" and yes, words matter. Especially in legislation.<p>>“We’ve checked to make sure, we believe it’s constitutional.”<p>It may be constitutional but it certainly isn't scientific. It's closer to the for-profit use of medical ideas in "anti-gay" "de-patterning" camps and the like. Except backed by people with firearms and a tendency to use them without consequence.
Official release: <a href="https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-joins-attorney-general-james-and-bill-sponsors-sign-nation-leading-legislation" rel="nofollow">https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-joins-attor...</a>
"NetChoice vice president and general counsel Carl Szabo said in a statement that the law would "increase children's exposure to harmful content by requiring websites to order feeds chronologically, prioritizing recent posts about sensitive topics.""<p>In case anyone was wondering why feeds are not ordered chronologically. Has nothing to do with ads.
We need to think bigger. Having an app on your phone is like having a stranger in your house. The same legal protections that apply to property should apply inside the software that runs on your phone. An app should be at the mercy of the user and should provide easy (and automated) ways to turn off manipulative and surveillance features.