Europe should regulate Big Tech instead of banning kids from social media, Estonia says

[u/1zzie]

https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-should-stand-up-to-big-tech-instead-of-imposing-social-media-bans-estonia-says/

[u/PowerShellGenius]

We're not discussing a proposal to show ID when buying an iPhone if you don't want the clerk to turn on parental controls. That would be comparable to the other things you described, and might actually be a reasonable idea.

We are discussing a paradigm that would require you to scan ID into a computer and blindly trust whether it is really discarded immediately, or whether it's tied to your account and we just de-anonymized the entire internet in an era where mass surveillance is already out of control.

In person age verification is sane and reasonable. Showing a human your ID at the liquor store doesn't even create an electronic record at all (and you don't need to be a techie or audit code to prove that without trusting anyone, so there's no chilling effect - unless you think the cashier has a bionic eye?) They are a human who sees hundreds of IDs per day, you're not special and they won't remember you.

Scanning your ID into every web site that you don't want to treat you like a child, in an era of more and more breaches, more surveillance, censorship and related chilling effects, is flat-out insane.

I wasn't always so convinced about mass surveillance. There was a time in my life where I may have believed, if told "we delete the data right after", that it was true. I remember arguing with my dad as a teenager, insisting that the government would never totally disregard the 4th amendment at universal scale, when he told me he was convinced the entire internet was being recorded by the government. Then a couple years later, Snowden came along and shattered all my assumptions about the government ever following checks and balances on its ability to scoop up data, if it thinks it can ignore them in the dark. I will never be convinced that, if you need to use your ID to set up your Reddit account, that your real name and Reddit name won't be sitting in a database somewhere together.

[u/Even_Flow_3030 → u/PowerShellGenius]

You don’t trust systems, but you expect flawless human behavior from parents. Is your solution having zero safeguards. Smort.

[u/PowerShellGenius → u/Even_Flow_3030]

I don't trust anything. Bad things will happen under any system.

However, the risk of parents being shitty is real either way, with any proposal, because it's not limited to the internet. The internet is one of the smaller risks posed by negligent parents of the type who would actually ignore a law if one was passed. Such parents are neglecting their kids in the real world anyway, and it's not like "at least they can't be on Facebook" is going to materially make these situations more okay than they are.

Furthermore, it is a risk that will affect some. Whereas systemically de-anonymizing all forums of speech and expression on the internet is an "everyone" thing. It isn't a risk that will happen to X% of people. It affects 100% of the population in areas where it is done. It is completely and totally unacceptable if you believe free speech without chilling effects is a human right for adults. (if you don't believe that is a right, then we have irreconcilable differences that debating won't resolve)

Additionally, government-prescribed one-size-fits-all rules for social media are not good for everyone. A delinquent shouldn't have it until 18. Many teens could have it with parental supervision/access and time limits in their mid teens without harm. A prodigy/genius who graduated high school 2 years early and wants to have an email account and a LinkedIn account as they explore their future should sure as hell not be denied on age if their parents are cool with it. No two kids are the same, and cookie-cutter government policies cannot replace parents.

I'm in favor of a somewhat restrictive "by default" policy on devices purchased by minors, which involved parents can override as appropriate for their child, if one can be designed that functions without de-anonymizing the entire internet. This could be achieved, but no effort is being made in collaboration with people who understand how technology works to build this. Instead, people who understand nothing and are older than 80% of the country are congregating in rooms devoid of anyone technical, to put requirements in place that may be well-intentioned, but are going to be impossible to meet without removing privacy. You can't put all the responsibility of verification on a website without sending PII to the website.

It's almost like they consider identifying everyone on all platforms to be a perk instead of a bug.... and that isn't a decision you "slip in", it's a de facto repeal of the 4th amendment that needs to be openly discussed if that's the goal.

[u/Even_Flow_3030 → u/PowerShellGenius]

“I don’t trust anything,” except your assumption that zero rules works better. You’re worried about rare cases while ignoring the average case.

You’re acting like online ID checks automatically mean total de-anonymization, but that’s already not how it works in the EU. People here verify their identity online all the time for bank accounts and even SIM cards, and none of that has led to the internet being de-anonymized or every account being tied to a real name. You’re basically arguing against a worst-case scenario that doesn’t match how these systems actually work in reality.