You must log in or register to comment.
Knowing our far right government (don’t be fooled by the NCP calling themselves “fiscal conservatives”, they’re no better than the 2 actual far right parties in the government), this is just an excuse to increase control and surveillance of citizens
They probably won’t / can’t ban small / foreign federated social media like ours. Kids who really want to hang out on socials ought to crawl onto the Fediverse. Like we did on forums at the pre-social media stage of the internet.
with guardian supervision, of course
Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and even your worst enemy will sometimes agree with you. Social media may not be automatically bad but effectively all for-profit implementations are irredeemably corrupted and a catastrophic danger to the fabric of democracy and civilization. Banning it will not eliminate it but it is the only viable harm reduction strategy we have available for any of us at this point. Techbro dominance and devastating levels of abuse by cynical, manipulative actors has robbed us of the luxury of choosing any more reasonable, nuanced approaches.
It’s not that I disagree with that, but I can guarantee that our government doesn’t think of technofascist dominance as a bad thing. Like @Zaktor@sopuli.xyz said, this is being pushed to make it easier to gather data on us. Age verification does nothing to fix the underlying problem.
This government is explicitly antidemocratic and is eg. working on expanding police and military intelligence’s ability to wiretap and hack people, even if they aren’t suspected of a specific crime. There is exactly zero chance that the data on who logged into what service will not be used against us citizens eventually.
Except this solution has nothing to do with your complaints. It’s not a ban, it’s age verification, i.e., improved data gathering, and that applies to all users, not just children.
My point exactly.
Personally i’d rather see certain mechanisms banned, rather then certain websites. Knives are imo a great example of how you can target a certain kind of use by making laws very specific: kitchen knives are totally legal to sell in the netherlands, but all self-respecting companies have policies not to sell to minors. If they’re in your kitchen you’re totally fine, if you bring them to a football match youre breaking a law (because of ‘intent of use’). Also, if you have a knife in your kitchen that isn’t meant for cutting food (e.g. a certain size, station, certain mechanisms) you’re breaking the law because those types of knives are always considered to be intended as a weapon. There are clear rules on when it is a useful tool and when it is a dangerous weapon. We can also make this for code.
Banning time-spent rewarding (ad-funded, pay-to-play) business models would remove the incentive to cause addiction.
Selling lootboxes without telling what’s in them is banned in the Netherlands because it is considered gambling. Great move if you ask me.
The most of the articles of the DSA regulates social media like this without age restrictions (ignoring the one vague article about age restriction).
Unfortunately, the DSA is not enforced due to fears of retaliation by Trump.
