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

  • 24
    I need the government to tell me what its safe for me to be allowed to see on the internet.
  • 288
    I don't!
Internet

Comments

  • Murkymerv on 02/07/2025 - 19:14
    +31

    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 đź’Ż

    • spackbace on 02/07/2025 - 19:22
      +7

      God is not going to save us

      Dammit

      Puts down Cool-aid

      • tenpercent on 03/07/2025 - 11:40
        +10

        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
        -1

        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.

        • 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
            -1

            @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
              -4

              @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?

              • R4 on 05/07/2025 - 14:50
                -1

                @ldq: What about, what about, what about a bit of whataboutism to brighten up your day.

                None of that excuses antisemitism. The fact that some people, like you, are cool with an increase in the hatred of Jews, shows you what messed up times we live in.

                Bizarre.

                • ldq on 05/07/2025 - 15:18
                  -2

                  @R4: Generations of my ancestors hated Jews back in Europe, was that messed up? Or maybe quite the opposite and every expulsion and every pogrom was fully justified? I would rather side with my ancestors.
                  You have no arguments to support your position, just the vacuous indignation, huffing and puffing over muh holocaust.

                  • R4 on 05/07/2025 - 19:59
                    -1

                    @ldq: Pogroms against Jews were somehow justified? You really believe that? Wow, just wow. No wonder antisemitism is increasing unchecked across the West.

                    If that's your viewpoint, any meaningful debate between us is impossible. You do you.

                    • ldq on 05/07/2025 - 22:20

                      @R4: What debate? You debate nothing, you only roll your eyes in sanctimonious horror, because I overstep the tenets. In the meantime scores of people are witness to the genocide, terror and war caused by Jews and justifiably demand for this behaviour to be punished. What makes you think our ancestors were uncultured unreasonable thugs and not people exactly like us who were fortunately capable (unlike us) of dishing out the well deserved punishment?

            • Protractor on 05/07/2025 - 15:32

              @R4: I'm still busy reading a contemporary account of live genocides in the middle east.

      • tessel on 04/07/2025 - 09:47
        +7

        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
          -7

          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
            +2

            @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
            +3

            @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

            @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.

    • frewer on 06/07/2025 - 06:40

      Come on man. Have a little hope will ya

  • Malik Nasser on 02/07/2025 - 19:27
    +16

    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
        +2

        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
    +24

    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
      +6

      Will they come for VPNs next

      • skittlebrau on 03/07/2025 - 18:09
        +8

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

      • Pussqunt on 07/07/2025 - 21:31

        Kinda hard when we have had open router firmware on cheap hardware for decades. And even if they try to enforce modem mandates, you just place your router one level down.

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

    Trolls really are working hard after the federal elections!

    • Binchicken22 on 05/07/2025 - 06:01
      +1

      Na this is a real life, the government is actually implementing this. This isn't a troll.

    • BlahBlahBlaah on 06/07/2025 - 02:04
      -3

      And Albo voters are stull denying that he's a complete imbecile

  • SBOB on 02/07/2025 - 19:32
    +13

    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
    +11

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

  • Big L on 02/07/2025 - 19:35
    +18

    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
      +7

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

    • Pussqunt on 07/07/2025 - 22:00

      Disagree to your edit. Grew up on the unfiltered net. Never once stumbled across a dictator. Saw plenty of their work. Didn't make me want to become a dictator.

      Monster crimes have been decreasing steadily as they are committed by a broader cross section of society and tech has made these harder. Most smart people realise this and abstain, and most dumb or mentally ill people are usually easy to catch early.

      We had recent blips with property and more minor crimes that have escalated to deadly, but we have gutted the dole purchasing power over the last twenty years while increasing the difficulty to access. If we make it impossible for a youth to comply with the law (like hold a licence and register a car), why would they comply with drink and drug driving laws? Internet censorship can't help with this.

      And as much as they suck, social media toxic feedback loops just made these social networks more visible and easier to monitor and destroy. Indigenous Australians didn't need a referendum in '67 to be considered humans because of Facebook.

      Tl;Dr: esafety commissioner is a waste of time and money. Monster crimes are reduced mostly with gun control and the knowledge of DNA testing of victims. Major escalations to minor crimes can be reduced by increasing social services spend (which will significantly reduce spend cleaning up after the numpties).

      • Protractor on 07/07/2025 - 22:13
        +1

        Meh, yeah nah.Disagree with your disagreement. the e commissioner is a good start. Especially in the absence of any sign humans have the capacity to do a 180 degree back-flip on their toxic trajectory. We can't fix the adults, so we may as well throw everything we have to protect the kids.
        Parents can't,won't,don't parent, so we have to invest more in cotton-wool to reduce collateral damage. So called intelligent ppl have stopped vaccinating the most vulnerable among us. Based on toxic pus on the internet.

        eg Watch tonight's 4 Corners. The physical equivalent of web behaviour 'she'll be right' , manifests as plastics impacts which have decades later awoken the sleeping dragon of generational cancer. Lets all hope the science on this (thus far ) is wrong. Meantime I'm well over ppl rejecting the precautionary principle, based on paranoia and conspiracy theories, when the science is the same, but more data emphatic, decade after decade.

        TDLR An e commissioner making a minor dent now, is better than a white flag and business as usual, while we kick the can down the road..

        • Pussqunt on 07/07/2025 - 22:31

          We are a nation of migrants from war torn countries. Most of the damage is happening in the family home from the parents, hence 80% of police call outs in most regions are DV.

          Watching a video of a friendly nation's war crimes isn't going to burn a building or put a vehicle on the sidewalk. Daddies irrational hatred and stupidness or mental health issues will.

          My peers met/tried to meet their creater before social media. Social media didn't invent bullying or depression.

          The internet is just an easy scape goat to avoid dealing with actual issues, like garbage people, poor people and mental health.

          The esafety commissioner is kicking the can down the road.

          • Protractor on 07/07/2025 - 23:09

            @Pussqunt: You think the internet & social media is a minor player. I don't.That's cool.
            I think normalising the abnormal for data and profit and power is just another brand of evil.
            Mainly because not everybody even knows they are being emotionally,intellectually and spiritually sucked dry.
            Much like religion does.
            Yep DV is a growing cancer.(It has a lot of help along the way) Yep war (old and new, defines the colonial mindset. We literllay worship ANZAC, and not in a good way ( what a senseless waste of lives) , and use denial as a doona in regards to ppl who match our accents or skin tones, & are currently committing daylight genocide. Religion isn't the solution, but nor is total immersion and capitulation to the happy hunting ground of the web. The great big intellectual gill net being dragged happily along by capitalism and western powers to take all before it. With no escape hatch for the by catch.At least the eC is acknowledging the can. And making contact with it. How's the big tech bro camp doing on that front? Trumpy boy?

            • Pussqunt on 09/07/2025 - 00:41

              @Protractor: My understanding was DV was declining. You got a link to government fatality stats to back up your raising claim?

              No, the world is not going to Hell. And the parts where it is have more to do with conquest than populations stired up social media.

              Yes, it sucks talking to people who have been sniffing their social media bubble too much, but compared to active war zones, dealing with them is minor.

              Is breeding social awkwardness for profit evil? Agree. But on a scale with the world's other troubles, it's similar to kicking a puppy.

              I like it how my inability to relate social media to r, m, war and genocide makes me a Trump supporter…

    • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 19:48
      +16

      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

            @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
        -5

        Trump is just trolling/shitposting

        • SBOB on 02/07/2025 - 20:14
          +9

          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
            -1

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

            • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 20:28
              +10

              @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
                  +2

                  @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
                    -6

                    @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

                  @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
                    +11

                    @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
                        +5

                        @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.

          • Binchicken22 on 05/07/2025 - 06:05
            -1

            @SBOB: Surely you can see there's a difference between pornography restrictions for minors and social media ID verification… Even with the lefty brain rot.

            • SBOB on 05/07/2025 - 08:53
              +1

              @Binchicken22: Did you even read what the topic is about
              It's not social media, its search engines

              And it clearly included pornogrpahic material
              The code requires providers to review and mitigate “the risk that Australian children will access or be exposed to online pornography, high-impact violence material, and self-harm material” in search engine results.

              Surely a critical thinker such as yourself could see the clear alignment or overlap between the conservative legislation being apllied in the US and the wording in this.
              Ignoring the fact that there are also conservative states in the US implementing or on the path similar social media age verification laws as well

          • infinite on 05/07/2025 - 22:00
            -2

            @SBOB: The age verification laws are not restrictive of using or visiting/viewing anything on any porn site - they simply require a user to be age-verified in order to upload content to any porn site, or sell content from a porn site/platform.

            No reasonable person has any issue with that.

      • Binchicken22 on 05/07/2025 - 06:03
        -2

        Haha classic lefty take opposing pornography bans for children.

    • 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
    +6

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

    • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 19:47
      +7

      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.

          • ajr5k on 05/07/2025 - 00:34

            @AustriaBargain: The same people who can't work out how to tax business correctly are going to invent an AI capable of doing this?

          • CocaKoala on 05/07/2025 - 13:19

            @AustriaBargain: Another option is to employ one government official per child using a computer. They will just stand beside the child and watch what they're doing.

            /s

        • trapper on 05/07/2025 - 15:40
          +1

          It doesn't need to be easy to enforce. The law is passed and now it's the law.

          A few targeted prosecutions for "VPN crimes" would quickly establish this as the new reality.

          Who is going to risk years in jail for this?

    • Caped Baldy on 03/07/2025 - 09:52
      +1

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

  • mskeggs on 02/07/2025 - 19:46
    +15

    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
      -6

      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
        +14

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

  • ValueInvesting on 02/07/2025 - 19:54
    +5

    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
      +6

      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
          +10

          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.

          • CocaKoala on 05/07/2025 - 13:58

            @mskeggs:

            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

            You are just making assumptions. Large corporations are very good with security. For example, take someone like Optus, Telstra, medibannk, etc. You can't really break through their security.

            /s

    • 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?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join