Sydney (AFP) – Australia’s world-leading ban on under-16s joining social media sites cleared a big hurdle Friday as a trial found digital age checks can work “robustly and effectively”.
Sites such as Facebook, Instagram, Tiktok and X could face fines of up to Aus$50 million (US$32 million) for failing to comply with the legislation, which was passed in November.
They have described the law – which is due to come into effect by the end of this year – as vague, rushed and “problematic”.
There has been widespread concern over children’s use of online platforms as evidence shows that social media can have negative effects on children’s mental and physical health.
Digital age verification systems – which would be critical to the ban – can work, said the interim findings of an independent Age Assurance Technology Trial, conducted for the government.
“These preliminary findings indicate that age assurance can be done in Australia privately, robustly and effectively,” it said.
There are “no significant technological barriers” to deploying age checking systems in Australia, said the trial’s project director, Tony Allen.
“These solutions are technically feasible, can be integrated flexibly into existing services and can support the safety and rights of children online,” he said in a statement.
In a separate interview with Australia’s Nine Network, Allen said preventing children circumventing age verification tools was a “big challenge”, however.
“I don’t think anything is completely foolproof,” he said.
There are a “plethora” of approaches to age verification but no single solution to suit all cases, said the trial report, in which 53 organisations took part.
Australia’s legislation is being closely monitored by other countries, with many weighing whether to implement similar bans.
Greece spearheaded a proposal this month for the European Union to limit children’s use of online platforms by setting an age of digital adulthood – barring children from social media without parental consent.
“These verification systems are robust and effective, just take our word for it though. Don’t ask what they are, just take our word for it.”
… Did this just imply that the blocking measures are effective on children who comply with blocking measures? No shit Sherlock, the systems already in place of politely asking you to give your age are effective on people who accurately give their age. Not that that is the main issue, but still.
The issue was never preventing childen from using it. Parental controls baked into every operating systems could do that for decades. But since that’s not the real goal, you ignore that.
The issue is and always was collecting data from everyone to prevent children from using it. Then there are privacy issues, use of proprietary software, and inevitable data leaks. Will government take responsibility for each data leak due to their incompetence forcing this on everyone?
So while it’s cool it “<…> can support the safety and rights of children online <…>”, fuck off with your surveillance bill.