Age Verified Login to Use Any Search Engine Required from End of 2025

GordonD on 02/07/2025 - 18:54

Its the old quote from the pre-Nazi days in Germany. It starts with "first they came for the socialists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist". I hope everyone is acquainted with history to know how it goes from there. And that it ends with "… and then they came for me."

Well, first they came for our kids, telling them the government would decide in their interests what they could see on social media. But I didn't speak out because I wasn't a kid. Now, we are told, the government's eSafety Commissioner has decided that from the end of this year, me and you, all us grownup adults who are just as able to decide what's good for us on the internet as the government, will, to be allowed to do an internet search, have to have an account with that search provider, which will require us to provide them with proof of identity, and be logged on, so the eSafety nazis can decide what we can see.

https://theconversation.com/australians-will-soon-need-their…

I can tell you, I won't be searching how to vote Labor, it'll be how not to.

And won't that database be great pickings for anyone to hack into and steal.

(Yes, I'm well aware of Godwin's Law, but sometimes …)

Poll Options

  • 14
    I need the government to tell me what its safe for me to be allowed to see on the internet.
  • 165
    I don't!
Internet

Comments

  • Murkymerv on 02/07/2025 - 19:14
    +18

    If you've been paying attention and not being distracted by non sensical garbage politicians constantly spout , you'd have known Orwellian times are upon us . God is not going to save us 💯

    • spackbace on 02/07/2025 - 19:22
      +5

      God is not going to save us

      Dammit

      Puts down Cool-aid

      • tenpercent on 03/07/2025 - 11:40
        +6

        The only choice is a slow (but getting faster) march towards authoritarianism as long as the majority of people restrict their voting choices to Labor or Lib-Nats.

      • R4 on 03/07/2025 - 19:43
        -3

        We're seeing the beginning of your first choice right now - especially the growing anti-semitism in the West. Driven largely by radical Western muslims, aided and abetted by their useful idiots on the left. Islam cannot be questioned and held up as being ideal yet Judaism and Christianity are run down, criticised and ridiculed at every turn. Your second choice has been on the rise but I think that madness has crested now and hopefully starting to decline. The time of weak leaders who bring bad times (always and inevitable) is peaking. Society goes in circles.

        • John Barosa on 03/07/2025 - 20:53
          -4

          I really don't understand the gays for Palestine movement. Like I like Palestine, ONLY because they're homophobic, and I'm homophobic too. Like actually wtf, those palestinians would throw these gays of a rooftop and cheer lol.

          Don't get me wrong, I love Muslims, I love their values. But I also don't want to live like them, and I think capping their population is a good thing.

          Christianity is seeing a renaissance imo.

          Judaism is actually (profanity), I actually feel kinda bad for Jews outside of NYC/Israel, no one is going to do business with then

          • R4 on 03/07/2025 - 20:56

            @John Barosa: Yep. I read an article about how a lot of gay men from Gaza and the Left Bank live in the large LGB community in Tel Aviv. At home they'd either be dead or pretending to be straight.

            • John Barosa on 03/07/2025 - 21:06

              @R4: Israel lets people move from Gaza to Israel? TIL. Thought they wanted them all gone.

        • ldq on 04/07/2025 - 16:04

          What's wrong with the growing antisemitism? It appears to be perfectly alright to be anti-English or anti-Russian or almost anti-anything, but when you are against the Jews you are instantly the devil incarnate. It's especially hard to sell this to the younger generation who are not under the same spells as the post-war generations were. The younger ones watch the genocide, acts of terror and war committed by Jews live online and trust their own eyes and not the old wives' tales.

          • R4 on 04/07/2025 - 16:53

            @ldq: 'What's wrong with the growing antisemitism?'

            Seriously? Read a history book of the 20th century FFS!

            • ldq on 04/07/2025 - 18:00

              @R4: Fallacy cannot form a valid argument.
              The USSR lost 27 million people in the WWII, most of them civilians, most of them Russian, how come it's not morally reprehensible to be anti-Russian and perfectly fine for so many countries to actively wage a proxy war against Russia?

      • tessel on 04/07/2025 - 09:47
        +4

        Honest question. Why did you get down voted so much? I think there's a lot of truth in what you say. Religion, any religion, should have no place in politics. You only have to look at Islamic countries around the world and see how it is ingrained it is, which I completely disagree with. I think it is very naive to think "oh that won't happen here". Why when it's happened everywhere else? It's the same view some people have that communism is a good idea but it's just never been implemented properly. As if they know how to make it work.

        The way we are going with politics now, yes, woke is the new norm. If you disagree with anything you are immediately labeled a racist or some type of "phobia". No longer can people have open discussions without being labeled something. When you oppress views and opinions (not talking about extreme lets kill them all), then what do you think happens? Shaming certain opinions or views doesn't make them go away, it only cements and affirms them. This approach and kind of politics is exactly why Trump got elected.

        • John Barosa on 04/07/2025 - 12:54

          I got downvoted cause people have lost their minds. I know not how this mass manipulation happened. Happened sometime between 2012 and 2020. I reckon most people would disagree significantly with themselves even 13 years ago.

          Look at homosexuality. It was never taken seriously, until just a few years ago. Even Obama didn't support their marriage rights. It was seen as nothing more than a fetish, and it's ridiculous, that these relationship are put on the same level as heterosexual relationships. I blame these people, for the degeneracy of society.

          Sure make homosexuality legal. But don't allow them to marry, don't allow them to adopt, and tell kids that homosexuality is an alternative NOT a substitute. (profanity) insane, we'll end up like Europe, if these (profanity) treat Australia, like a playground

          • tessel on 04/07/2025 - 13:28
            +1

            @John Barosa: I definitely don't agree with everything you said but provided you aren't spewing hate and calling for certain groups not to exist then you should be free to express your opinions and you shouldn't be down voted no matter how much someone disagrees with you. I think a cornerstone of democracy is that people need to be heard or at least not have the fear their opinion is not politically correct. This is Ozbargain, not whirlpool, so I'll leave it at that.

          • jackspratt on 04/07/2025 - 15:00
            -1

            @John Barosa:

            I got downvoted cause people have lost their minds

            No, you got downvoted because people have different minds to yours - thankfully.

        • Autonomic on 04/07/2025 - 15:29

          I'm genuinely curious as to what innocent ideas or discussions you're having that are getting you labelled racist? And why is Trump the saviour of free speech when he's actively trying to strip citizenship of people who express certain opinions e.g. anything even remotely pro Palestine

          • tessel on 04/07/2025 - 17:48
            -1

            @Autonomic: I think many who voted for Trump aren't happy with what ICE is doing. That's another discussion. I found an example on Reddit. Victoria is trying to legislate first people's assembly. One of the top contents was "que the xenophobes". So, if someone disagrees with what Victoria is trying to do they are by default a racist. Disagree with anything and you are a racist or some other label. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with what Victoria wants to do but preople shouldn't immediately be called racists because they have an opinion against something.

            • Autonomic on 04/07/2025 - 17:53
              -1

              @tessel:

              I think many who voted for Trump aren't happy with what ICE is doing

              You mean….exactly what he said he was going to do? Trumps approval rate among his base is at an all time high. It's also not a separate discussion. It's your entire premise. Also is it safe to say you're anti-Trump based on his incredibly anti free speech position?

              I found an example on Reddit

              First of all, lol. Second of all it seems like you are against free speech if you're getting offended by a reddit comment. Third of all no one even used the word racist in your own example.

  • Malik Nasser on 02/07/2025 - 19:27
    +12

    Yet another reason to have a VPN, and set your IP to O/S.
    Most of these measures are easy enough to get around for those who care to look.

    “A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.”

    • bbinc on 03/07/2025 - 11:13

      Can you use a VPN with CGNAT?

      • skittlebrau on 03/07/2025 - 18:08
        +1

        Yes, you can use a VPN client on CGNAT.

        You just can't run your own VPN server at home if you have CGNAT, but you can get around that by using an overlay/mesh VPN solution with exit node like Tailscale or ZeroTier.

  • AngoraFish on 02/07/2025 - 19:28
    +14

    My VPN doesn't care what the Australian government thinks.

    • John Barosa on 02/07/2025 - 19:53

      Based. I thikn I'm gonna get one.

    • surfingedge on 03/07/2025 - 16:48
      +2

      Will they come for VPNs next

      • skittlebrau on 03/07/2025 - 18:09
        +4

        If China can't stop citizens from using obfuscated VPNs, there's no chance the Australian government can.

  • SYLTB on 02/07/2025 - 19:31
    +18

    Trolls really are working hard after the federal elections!

  • SBOB on 02/07/2025 - 19:32
    +11

    need the government to tell me what its safe for me to be allowed to see on the internet

    If you're using Bing or google
    - you're already having a large tech giant determine what's 'safe' to see on the internet
    - you're already being tracked way, with significantly more technical abilities, than what the government could hope to do

    But no, requiring the providing/linking of identification to a Google account, for google to return anything deemed "18+" in its search results is clearly not a solution that's is acceptable (not likely technically feasible like most 'age verification' proposed "solutions")

    • Protractor on 02/07/2025 - 19:38
      +2

      That's the key question here. If GordonD has a google acct or gmail, this is a parody post.

  • Qazxswec on 02/07/2025 - 19:34
    +9

    First they came for Slavoz, now they're coming for GordonD

  • Big L on 02/07/2025 - 19:35
    +11

    The nuffies are getting upset about Facebook and social media bans, meanwhile…..

    Since 2013, the Australian government has introduced several significant laws and frameworks to regulate the harvesting and sharing of citizens' data. The primary legislative developments include:

    1. Privacy Regulation 2013

    Supplemented the existing Privacy Act 1988, reinforcing rules around the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information by federal government agencies and many private sector organizations.

    Introduced and clarified the Australian Privacy Principles (APPs), which set out obligations for entities handling personal data, including requirements for notification, consent, and permitted disclosures.

    1. My Health Records Act 2012 (with 2016 amendments)

    Created the legislative framework for the My Health Record system, a national digital health record platform.

    The Act and its amendments strictly regulate how health data is collected, used, and shared, with specific limitations on disclosures without consent.

    1. Privacy Amendment (Notifiable Data Breaches) Act 2017

    Amended the Privacy Act to introduce a mandatory data breach notification scheme.

    Organizations must notify affected individuals and the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) if a data breach is likely to result in serious harm.

    1. Consumer Data Right (CDR) – Introduced 2020

    Grants consumers the right to access data held about them by businesses and to direct that data to be shared with accredited third parties.

    Initially rolled out in the banking sector (Open Banking), then extended to the energy sector, with plans to cover other sectors such as telecommunications and non-bank lending.

    The CDR is designed to enhance consumer control, competition, and innovation, with strict consent and accreditation requirements for data sharing.

    1. Data Availability and Transparency Act 2022 (DAT Act)

    Establishes a new scheme for sharing government-held data across agencies and with accredited users, underpinned by strong safeguards, transparency, and periodic reviews.

    The Act aims to improve the availability of government data for service delivery, research, and policy, while maintaining privacy protections.

    1. Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2024

    Amends the Privacy Act to introduce further protections and requirements, with most changes commencing in 2025.

    Key amendments include enhanced notification and consent requirements, and expanded powers for the OAIC.

    Key Features Across These Laws:

    Consent: Most data sharing requires either implied or express consent, though some exceptions apply for law enforcement or health and safety situations.

    Notification: Organizations are generally required to notify individuals about the collection and intended use of their data.

    Oversight: The OAIC enforces compliance, investigates breaches, and can seek civil penalties for violations.

    Sector-specific rules: Health, credit, and government data have additional, stricter rules and oversight.

    These legislative changes reflect a trend toward greater transparency, consumer control, and regulatory oversight of personal data handling by both government and private entities in Australia since 2013.

  • Protractor on 02/07/2025 - 19:35
    +2

    e safety commissioner is independent.

    So what are her justifications for this (Protecting children? Other?)
    Does it apply to all search engines?

    My biggest gripe with this is, it means more shit posts where ppl will use this "sign in excuse", to NOT use google.
    And the rebirth of Godwins Law.
    PS. I rarely use google as a search engine. They know more than enough about you now, without lifting a finger. With every search they get more of you.

    EDIT as someone points out below, if Gordo is already a hostage of google then this is faux outrage. Me, I'm more than happy to have an e safety commissioner period. Beats the (profanity) out tof the alternative.There's too many monster in the world already. Leaving it up to the billionaire tech suck-holes to filter rout the toxicity has failed.They put $ before safety. They have no conscience.The NRA of the web.

    • tenpercent on 02/07/2025 - 21:09
      +1

      They know more than enough about you now, without lifting a finger. With every search they get more of you.

      Spend a few moments every day using Google to search for things you're not interested in. Poison the data.

    • pegaxs on 03/07/2025 - 08:57
      +6

      Dude, Godwin's Law didnt even last till the end of OP's first sentence.

    • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 19:48
      +13

      The funny thing about your posts is if you tried to enter the USA there is a good chance they'd deny you entry for being too big a risk based on your post history!

        • bbinc on 03/07/2025 - 11:17
          +1

          Please verify your Truth Social account.

          • John Barosa on 03/07/2025 - 21:09
            +1

            @bbinc: Right wing social media accounts aren't fun. If you keep on making posts, and everyone agrees with you, where's the fun? where's the thrill?

            It's also why my only friends, are left wing people, who hate Trump. Cause when I say "Being gay is wrong", we have an argument instead of them saying "true"

    • SBOB on 02/07/2025 - 20:06
      +1

      As a proud conservative, who's very homophobic, transphobic and a massive Trump supporter, I'm very scared for this bill.
      Please Trump liberate us, we need this

      Restricting access to 18+ material to minors, and requiring age based verification, is already within the kinds of legislation your conservative brethren in the US is enacting
      Eg https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/27/supreme-cour…

      You should be cheering for such legislation, as a proud conservative

      • John Barosa on 02/07/2025 - 20:09
        -4

        Trump is just trolling/shitposting

        • SBOB on 02/07/2025 - 20:14
          +6

          Unsure how that's a response.
          Many republican led conservativd states in the US have already passed age verification bills.
          The fact you're against or scared of this bill while it clearly aligns with current proud conservative views across many US states seems at odds.

          Stand up and celebrate that this legislation like you should.

          • John Barosa on 02/07/2025 - 20:18

            @SBOB: I'm not that kind of conservative.

            • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 20:28
              +5

              @John Barosa: Maybe one of those conservatives who love saying how the gays are evil but keep getting busted in airport toilet cubicles, so anon access to adult material is important?

                • simplystu on 02/07/2025 - 21:11
                  +1

                  @John Barosa: we already have one … it's called "the world/earth/ "spinning ball of rock - that we exist on " …
                  yet as long as humans have grasped this concept … the whole notion of religion / morals / values == questioned.

                  and nah … STOP mincing things … eg. sexual predators / molesting kids == gay/same-sex ???
                  if YOU were to do research … more common with to do with heterosexual people (that the person most probably already knew beforehand) … as to ppl that cause those BAD things.

                  @John Barosa - just saying.

                  • John Barosa on 03/07/2025 - 21:13
                    -3

                    @simplystu: But they are sexual predators! I don't want my future kids growing up gay. But in public school, they will be told that it's okay, despite my beliefs that it isn't. IF they just stopped this, and stopped hosting the pride flag, I honestly wouldn't even care.

                    How would you feel, if Muslims came to your school, and told ur kids to stop eating pork? It's also why I don't care about Muslims, cause they leave me tf alone. I disagree with their views on women/their rituals, but they don't force it on me, so don't care.

              • spackbace on 02/07/2025 - 20:39
                +3

                @mskeggs: Nope, I reckon he's 1 of those who says "kill the gays" but watches lesbian porn…

                • John Barosa on 02/07/2025 - 20:41
                  +1

                  @spackbace: I don't like lesbian porn. I don't even call other people "mate", because I think it sounds too gay.

                  • spackbace on 02/07/2025 - 20:42
                    +7

                    @John Barosa: But you "love" Trump

                    That's pretty gay

                    • John Barosa on 02/07/2025 - 20:46
                      +2

                      @spackbace: Love in the hetero sexual way. As Elon Musk once said "I love Trump, as much as a straight man can love another man". I refuse to eat bananas the "normal" way, and I slowly break it apart, with my fingers, before eating it.

                      • spackbace on 02/07/2025 - 20:57
                        +4

                        @John Barosa:

                        Love in the hetero sexual way.

                        Ah huh… sure buddy

                        Surrrreeee

                      • tenpercent on 02/07/2025 - 21:12
                        +4

                        @John Barosa:

                        I refuse to eat bananas the "normal" way, and I slowly break it apart, with my fingers, before eating it.

                        lmao. I'm glad I didn't take a sip of my drink before reading this. It could have been messy.

                    • tenpercent on 02/07/2025 - 21:11
                      +3

                      @spackbace: Why did YMCA pop into my head?

                      • bbinc on 03/07/2025 - 11:20

                        @tenpercent: Because you’ve been watching too much Truth Social

                        • tenpercent on 03/07/2025 - 11:33
                          +1

                          @bbinc: I don't know what that is. But it popped into my head because it's hilarious that the orange clown managed to trick bible thumping gay hating conservatives to dance along with him to a retro gay anthem. Someone said Trump is a big troll. He is indeed.

                          • bbinc on 03/07/2025 - 11:34

                            @tenpercent: It’s the orange clown’s Social Media. And you can buy a Trump Bible!

              • iCandy on 03/07/2025 - 11:25

                @mskeggs: He is trolling you guys. He’s not serious.

    • jimmyzt on 03/07/2025 - 10:47
      +1

      Lmfao just say what we're all thinking here, you wanna be a bottom for Trump. Just make the video already and stop beating about your bush

  • joka on 02/07/2025 - 19:45
    +3

    But how were people expecting the age verification to work without verifying everyone, including adults?

    • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 19:47
      +6

      If you message it carefully in all the press releases it sounds like you were only making life hard for the kids.

    • AustriaBargain on 02/07/2025 - 19:47
      +1

      And if a VPN can get around it, will the government make a law banning ISPs from supporting any VPN or whatever?

      • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 19:52
        +1

        Hard to do, because you can use the ports for "allowed" traffic like web browsing. You need to go very strict and not care about over blocking like China does.

        • AustriaBargain on 02/07/2025 - 19:58

          They could make all operating systems take a screenshot every five seconds and then have it all processed by a central AI that can differentiate use patterns typical for people under 18 from people over 18.

          • Protractor on 02/07/2025 - 20:29

            @AustriaBargain: We are talking servers. Physical objects in physical locations, transferring data If "they" want eyes and ears into VPNs I'm sure the spooks could do it without much effort. AI will make it infinitely quicker and easier.
            If it sounds too good to be true, maybe it is?(eventaully)
            We are too smart for our own good.

          • tenpercent on 02/07/2025 - 21:01

            @AustriaBargain: Is this sarcasm? My upvote is based on the assumption that this is sarcasm.

    • Caped Baldy on 03/07/2025 - 09:52

      My gmail was made in 2005. I hope that's good enough. Otherwise, I'll be VPNing.

  • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 19:46
    +9

    This whole situation is a mess, and will cause a lot of anger.
    For everyone saying how they are fine because of their VPN, consider how you will feel when you have to prove your age to Facebook, insta, tiktok etc. then they ban your account because they detect you posting to marketplace from your overseas IP you forgot to turn off.

    There are serious issues with people being forced to identify themselves to use online services, take a look at threats to reproductive health in the USA or religious based persecution in many countries that has expanded risk if your personal information can be be tied to you across systems.

    For anyone saying there are laws to prevent misuse, consider laws can be changed or ignored.

    • Soundwave on 03/07/2025 - 12:11
      -1

      Just select Australian VPN servers. No need to choose overseas servers unless you're trying to get services cheaper like Netflix or whatever.

      • mskeggs on 03/07/2025 - 16:31
        +5

        How will a different IP address within Australia mean you aren’t subject to the law?

  • ValueInvesting on 02/07/2025 - 19:54
    +3

    It's pretty obvious you haven't read the article or the code.

    The code actually says:

    Internet search engine services are designed for general public use, with or without an account. Providers of internet search engine services are not required to implement age assurance measures for end-users who are not account holders.

    • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 19:58
      +4

      You don't see any downsides of proof of age requirements for accounts on social media?

      • um on 02/07/2025 - 20:12
        +1

        red herring fallacy

        • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 20:16
          +8

          Ok, I see considerable risks with age verification to have an account on social media.
          I have issues with privacy risks, I don't trust the government or enterprise to take effective security measures to protect my personal data, and there is no redress in this country if they fail.
          I also don't like the idea of putting infrastructure in place that can be expanded by future governments.

          • um on 02/07/2025 - 20:29
            +2

            @mskeggs: sorry, i should've been more clear - i don't think the person you replied to is necessarily for the ban, they're just pointing out that search engines probably won't be affected by it

            • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 20:34

              @um: Ta, I didn't read the post heading but have read about the law so I got the wrong end of the stick.

    • Protractor on 02/07/2025 - 20:30
      +1

      It's pretty obvious you haven't read the article or the code.

      Ironic, innit?

    • joshash on 03/07/2025 - 07:36

      What a joke the regulations are. Just log out, and you can do whatever you want..

      • Grunntt on 03/07/2025 - 12:06
        +1

        Just log out, and you can do whatever you want..

        Why do people log in anyway?

      • tenpercent on 03/07/2025 - 16:31
        -1

        What if your place of employment uses Google Workspace?

        • boirganz on 03/07/2025 - 19:22
          +1

          If youre on a work computer every single thing you look up, click on, type etc is usually logged and tracked anyway and it’s in your employment contract so the net change is 0

  • try2bhelpful on 02/07/2025 - 20:00
    +3

    Ya know it was a lot easier growing up in the 60s and 70s. If the predators wanted to groom kids it had to be face to face or by snail Mail.

    The paranoia on this website is astonishing. People are not going to end up in the gas chamber with these laws, ya might just have a tad more trouble watching porn or being a troll. Something does need to be done to protect kids and if it inconveniences me then so be it. They can modify it if it turns out not to work.

    If I was living in America, Russia or Israel I might be a tad more paranoid about how my Government was tracking me but not so much out here.

    In the meantime take a chill pill and don’t run around like chicken little.

    • bbinc on 03/07/2025 - 11:26
      +2

      Yeah/Nah

    • tenpercent on 03/07/2025 - 11:44
      +4

      If I was living in America, Russia or Israel I might be a tad more paranoid about how my Government was tracking me but not so much out here.

      What if Dutto had won the last election? Would you still be fine with this invasion of privacy?
      What if someone like Dutto wins a future election? Will you still be fine with it?

      • CaptainJack on 03/07/2025 - 16:21

        And would they have brought up America if Kamala had won? Nope. It's all about who's doing it, not what's being done with these sorts of people.

    • CaptainJack on 03/07/2025 - 16:17
      +1

      The idiots droning on about protecting the kids from imagined dangers are the ones being paranoid and running around like chicken little.

      • boirganz on 03/07/2025 - 19:29
        +2

        If you mean attempting to reduce the harm of porn, social media etc on children it’s not an imagined danger.

        These things are well researched and have clear negative effects.

        They’re bad enough on the rest of us, and we have more mature brains.

        Sure maybe an outright ban isn’t the best approach, but is it worthwhile trying something ? Yeah it is. We’re currently well into (profanity) up the next generations with the way we’re raising kids and their massive consumption of addictive and manipulative social media.

        As a parent I look forward to it. “Yeah nah you can’t have a mobile and be on tik tok. It’s against the law” is a lot easier than “I don’t care if all your friends are and you’re now being socially isolated…”

        • CaptainJack on 03/07/2025 - 20:27
          +1

          If you did care about the negative effects on your kids, its easily within your power to be a good parent and already be limiting what they can access. But no, you're lazy and want to outsource parenting to the government, meaning the rest of us that aren't bad parents get stuck with more government overreach.

          • boirganz on 04/07/2025 - 08:15

            @CaptainJack: There’s no lazy involved here mate. I’m just in favour of government doing its job which is to provide services and rule of law that improves our lot in life and benefits society as a whole.

            I happen to think this particular item - social media restriction for youth - falls within that scope. You don’t. That’s ok - we don’t need to agree as that’s the benefit of a democratic society with checks and balances. In this case the majority (so far) are aligned that this is a good practice and at least worth a shot as there is very little downside.

            Now whether it can be implemented in a reasonable fashion is another argument. I’m very skeptical.

            • CaptainJack on 04/07/2025 - 08:47

              @boirganz: You're welcome to your opinion, but if you truly think there's very little downside that's just incorrect.

              • boirganz on 04/07/2025 - 10:30

                @CaptainJack: I’m interested - in a well managed implementation - what are the major negatives in your opinion ?

                Maybe I’m missing something.

                • CaptainJack on 04/07/2025 - 11:03

                  @boirganz: There's a long list, but for one, you don't see any negatives with the government controlling what people can see on the internet? Its already moved on from stopping kids getting bullied to we need to know and control what you can search for.

                  Perhaps you can explain why I need to give up my anonymity, because you can't parent your kids properly.

                  And come on, no one thinks the implementation will be well managed. You can bet your bottom dollar they'll waste a tonne of taxpayer money of something that doesn't work.

                  • boirganz on 04/07/2025 - 13:59

                    @CaptainJack: Well none of what you just mentioned is grounded in the facts or reality, so what's an actual problem? With restricting social media from being consumed directly by those under a certain age?

                    That's the boundary of what is proposed, and that's the boundary of what I'm talking about. Nothing more.

                    The rest is just hyperbole and slippery slope logical fallacies.

                    • CaptainJack on 04/07/2025 - 14:09

                      @boirganz: Fact: The government will be (aiming to) control what people can see on the internet.
                      (Almost Certain) Reality: It will not be well-implemented.
                      Fact: Uploading personal identification is a risk, and even well-intentioned companies may have had security breaches.
                      Reality: Any benefits of the bill could be achieved through good parenting.
                      Fact: You don't understand what a slippery slope fallacy is.

                      • boirganz on 04/07/2025 - 16:19

                        @CaptainJack: Those are all opinions and speculations, and everyone is welcome to them. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at the outcome though, and if you are, or become a parent at any stage, will be thankful if it does end up getting implemented in a minimally-invasive way.

                        • CaptainJack on 04/07/2025 - 16:31

                          @boirganz: You even stated earlier that you could achieve the same thing for your kids yourself, but it'll be easier if the government does it for you. So even if the fourth item is only an opinion (its not), its an opinion you've acknowledged is correct.

                        • boirganz on 04/07/2025 - 16:40

                          @boirganz: I don’t parent all the kids in Australia.

                          The current generation coming through the school system at the moment need all the help they can get, and I’m happily in favour of reasonable measures by the government to do so.

                          (I mean really on a scale of things to fix this is pretty darn low given if they fixed the childcare and housing situation we’d have more present parents and less of a problem. But that’s a hard problem to fix and not short/medium term solvable)

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join