A US Bill Would Ban Kids Under 13 from Joining Social Media

This is movement is going to be widely regarded as on of the largest prohibitions in our era.<p>* Whatever verification system a user has to do to prove they are older than 13 will also being to freak users out about &#x27;whoes listening&#x27;. It&#x27;s insane to think a First Name, Last Name, and Address might be tied to _every reddit account_.<p>* That data will be used for government surveillance. Maybe I should start creating a hat out of metallic kitchen supplies, but I largely think &#x27;how can we spy on more Americans&quot; has been a central political battle fought over the last 3 decades. It&#x27;s a long fight, not over.<p>* This could cause all users to stop adopting these public networks, and and move to underground networks. Some underground networks will just normal application with some social space that aren&#x27;t targeted. Some might be based on traditional dark-web style services. Others might be based on something more web3-y.

Don&#x27;t know how this could be implemented in a good way (so FB etc do not get access to important identity information), but trying to limit social media for kids below 13 is a fantastic idea.<p>One could wish the adults&#x2F;parents would limit this themselves, but sadly this is seldom the case. For some reason it seems most parents really are clueless to the level of harm imposed by social media to their kids?!

The issue as I see it isn’t going to be solved by forcing social networks to gather even more personal information about individuals (eg proof of ID and proof of age). The issue is how social networks are engineered, either by chance or by design, to promote negativity in the pursuit of engagement.<p>If we can find a way to declaw social networks then we’d have a healthier ecosystem for all ages.<p>But this is a <i>much</i> harder problem to solve.

In other words, US bill will *require* all social media to violate user privacy.

Wouldn’t it make a lot more sense to simply have parental education around the harms of social media for kids under age XYZ?<p>I mean, I’m all in favor of the goals of this bill. I think social media is a horrible negative for people of all ages, but especially children since they largely don’t have the mental capability to defend against the smartest people in the world trying to hijack their brains.<p>But I can’t see how a “social media” ban can actually work. And im not even sure it’s actually better than parental education and information.

Interesting to compare this thread with the banning gas one in New York. In general once you accept the government making decisions for you “for your best interest”, don’t be shocked once they start doing things you disagree with.<p>This is why I generally do not support any bans dictated by the government.<p>In this case it’s difficult to find a reasonable solution that’s not draconian. You could tell parents to use screen limiting tools but those are unlikely to be used by the parents whose children need it the most.<p>Perhaps making social media require a $1&#x2F;year fee with it being returned to you after 6 months would stop the vast majority of children.

This seems a bit too far reaching of a legislative act under the guise of protecting the children.<p>Surely we could come up with a solution that isn&#x27;t an outright ban? Especially as technology has become so commonplace and many of our social interactions happen in digital spaces.<p>In any case, maybe it would be interesting to evaluate how other countries have approached these problems. I know that in South Korea you need a government ID to play certain multiplayer videogames, it would be interesting to explore the impact of these systems and what lessons can be gleamed.<p>Since I&#x27;m not a parent myself I haven&#x27;t really considered the problem domain with much care or consideration, but maybe some hacker parents could share their thoughts and insights as they&#x27;ve dealt with the existing ecosystem?

Which social networks do they have on mind? Facebook, Instagram, Twitter do not allow children under 13 to register an account due to already existing legislation (COPPA).

Given the social interactions that exist, shouldn&#x27;t this include online gaming platforms?

COPPA already exists and websites that properly adhere to it ask for age verification (granted usually in no verifiable capacity) and refuse service to anyone under 13 years old.<p>Personal anecdata, way back in the 90s in my childhood, a games website I used to frequent actually demanded potential users (read: kids) under 13 years old to fax in written consent from the parents to collecting information. Websites used to actually take COPPA seriously back then.<p>If this bill makes compliance to COPPA more stringent, well, the law already mandated it anyway. Kids and can&#x27;t-be-arsed parents will find workarounds, no doubt, and the world will keep spinning.<p>As an aside, I would rather the US government handle identification (they already have all the goods anyway) than the likes of GAFA.

Blanket ban anyone under 14 from having an online account, IMHO.

Government should not usurp parental functions. Stay the hell out of my house.

This seems like it would have been a great idea about thirty years ago, but would be functionally impossible to even try to enforce working from scratch today.

How about this… if your social network has ads, is funded by ads, etc, then ALL of the network falls under FTC compliance for children’s advertising.

Why are always these US politicans talking about banning something?<p>This decisions should only be up to the parents, not someone in DC...

Don&#x27;t care much for bans, but would not mind some sort of oauth system that includes age and ability for platforms&#x2F;users to block interactions &#x2F; content according to age range. I want to filter content a little bit like one filters dating profiles.

I&#x27;m not convinced that social media is a net positive, no matter what the age.

I&#x27;m all for it, though I won&#x27;t comment on this bill in particular, which seems to be lacking.<p>There are, of course, ways to implement this that don&#x27;t include sending even more personal data to social media companies. The most obvious way, for starters, would be through a government app or system that simply tells Facebook &quot;This user is over the age of 13&quot; without sending over any more information.<p>The reality is that we do need to do something about the issue, just like how porn shouldn&#x27;t be freely available to literal children. It&#x27;s an inevitable consequence of the internet moving into the very center of our lives.

What we need are laws requiring Social Media to support children. To give them a safe space that their parents can monitor. It should be a simple <i>affirmative</i> thing, like a birth-date, with no other authentication required.<p>That way a parent can set up the account for the child, and then monitor their activities through the site. Once they age out, their parents roles are reduced appropriately.<p>The same should also be true <i>in reverse</i>, so that adults can monitor the social media of their elderly parents, to keep them from getting scammed. This can be negotiated and agreed to by the parents.<p>Either way, a person under care of another should see zero ads.

Right, and how will they determine what a social media site is? People in power don&#x27;t get it because they&#x27;re mostly from the generation when the Internet hadn&#x27;t yet taken over every aspect of civilization.<p>Trying to impose a ban is such a lazy and naive solution. Kids will find alternatives. There are thousands of options for kids to go online and interact with one another. My guess would be that video games would become the next social platforms, and then what, ban video games? ban multiplayer games? I&#x27;m not saying do nothing. There are plenty of potential and creative solutions. Maybe something like incentivizing companies to build a kid-friendly version of their apps, and advising parents on how to be aware of what they&#x27;re using. Banning tech is usually not the answer in a world where tech is more and more part of everything.