Facebook Agrees To User Safety Plan 190
Facebook has reached an agreement with the attorneys general of 49 states and the District of Columbia to develop and enhance controls to protect minors from inappropriate content. This follows a similar commitment from MySpace several months ago. The lone holdout in each case was Texas. News.com notes:
"In the deal, the social network has agreed to develop age verification technology, send warning messages when an under-18 user may be giving personal information to an unknown adult, restrict the ability for people to change their ages on the site, and keep abreast of inappropriate content and harassment on the site. While the agreement is with U.S. state authorities, Kelly said that the tools deployed will apply to Facebook's international users as well. More than half of the site's 70 million users are outside the U.S."
For God's sake (Score:5, Insightful)
While Facebook might have to provide some responsibility, the 49 states and Columbia should actually tell the PARENTS to supervise their child's usage of the internet.
Re:For God's sake (Score:5, Insightful)
Radical solution: (Score:2, Interesting)
Youngsters don't need the internet to do research as they could go to a library and do their research the old-fashioned way. Youngsters have cell phones and text messaging, and if they don't have that then they could play sports or participate in a myriad of activities for social bonding.
The internet is like a playboy magazine: it has articles totally unrelated to sex, and it has the pictures - would you le
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
TV and radio are not bidirectional. A kid could see a murder on TV but if he thinks its cool to kill(and especially if he directly imitates the act) then he's an idiot and deserves to be punished. But, TV won't pretend to be an underage chick telling your kid to meet him at the park so that it can give him candy :)
TV may not be bidirectional, but the universe is. So if you stab someone, the consequence could be that they'd bleed to death. Another part of the universe, comprised of braincells contained within biological systems (often known as law enforcement bodies) will upon receiving this information (through lightwaves, soundwaves initiated by similar brain cells contained within any human subset of the class of organic systems etc.) would trigger a process that stimulates other brain cells in its proximity until
Re:Radical solution: (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh sure, I am 18 now and working as search engine optimizer and PHP coder. Learning these skills from library, with years old books, etc. without the access to internet would have been kinda... impossible? People don't NEED the internet and neither they NEED moder medicine. Maybe we should also make medicine illegal for people under 18 because some can become drug addicts.
Re: (Score:2)
It's an interesting opinion and an interesting point of view. There's no reason to squelch an opinion here just because you don't agree.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Reasonable exemption for academic or vocational use? That just won't cut it, really. If I hadn't had full access to internet when I was 10 years old, I wouldn't have though "This thing is awesome! I want to make webpages too!" and asked my father to teach me how to do that (HTML). I wouldn't have started my first game reviews website (only lasted two months or so, though. ;
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You are suggesting the police state.
Everybody is guilty of something, so you can jail them whenever you feel the need to.
Of course, you are only trying to turn most minors into outlaws, but your reasoning escalates pretty well.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Radical solution: (Score:5, Insightful)
Let them access whatever, as long as parents know (Score:2)
I'm not for censorship. I'm for spying on children.
If parents think their teenager is mature enough for uncensored internet access, thats fine with me.
But when the teenager uploads private information like their real name, their telephone number, their address, the ISP should send a letter to the parents telling them the list of sites which this information was uploaded to, or the list of IP addresses.
And there should be corporations setup with the specific purpose of helping parents to spy on their childre
Re:Let them access whatever, as long as parents kn (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Relationships are also no substitute for technology.
Not all kids are honest, or bright.
Re: (Score:2)
Be responsible, Spy on your children. (Score:2)
The best solution, is for parents to demand that ISPs offer internet monitoring services.
Certain keywords they select should be flagged.
Personal information should also be flagged.
When their children upload this information to the ISP, the ISP should keep it on record just as banks keep on record when you make a transaction.
If the child gives their name and address to the internet, the parent should know the list of websites and IP addresses that this information was passed onto. If it's uploaded to the IP
Re: (Score:2)
Why not just outlaw internet use for those under 18?
Why not just go all the way and lock them all in prison? It'd just be for their own good, and then we could stop from ... *gasp* ... having sex!
Or maybe you could just try to think a little and realize that teenagers have been fucking each other as long as there's been a human race and it has conspicuously failed to bring about the end of the world thus far. What kind of lives do you think these kids are having that stopping them from using the Inter
Let parents spy on their children. (Score:2)
Let's set up businesses to help parents spy on their childrens internet access. All communication uploaded which includes certain search terms or real names, addresses and other private information should be flagged and recorded.
A company could form to monitor the internet activity of their children for parents.
Lets nationalize the age of consent. (Score:5, Insightful)
Lets solve this problem once and for all and come up with ONE age of consent. One age which applies to all US territories and the internet, so that adults can know when they are breaking the law.
To have no age of consent is equal to having the drinking age be different in every state and having some states have bars with minors in them and other states having bars set to be over 21.
You cannot govern this way.
Re: (Score:2)
This was the case for a couple decades...between the setting of the national drinking age and several decades after prohibition (when age became important in the US.)
It really wasn't that much of an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Amend the constitution (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thats why you amend the constitution and add an age of consent to it.
The age of consent that you are referring to will only be applicable to US citizens and US websites. US laws have absolutely no relevance, nor are they wanted, in other countries where people are quite capable of producing and enforcing their own laws. Now, how do you propose to ensure that US underage citizens do not access those areas of the internet that we, in the rest of the world, deem perfectly acceptable to our citizens or where we are able to prevent our children accessing by providing the appr
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not suggesting that the US govern the entire internet. Only US run corporations have to follow US laws.
And the US internet already is like the great firewall of China. Our internet is not uncensorable.
I do not favor censorship, but if parents do not want their children to access certain sites I favor giving parents the right to censor children.
Similar to "you can access this website with your parents permission.", as a way to protect the website owners.
Well get used to it. (Score:2)
retirement
health care
schooling of their children
mortgages
How are those three a function of government? I really don't understand how people who send their kids to public school can complain about government censorship related to children. Really, what do you think goes on in your schools? You can't get information in some states about what actually does go on. Worse, in a few medical issues with your children is off l
Re:Well get used to it. (Score:4, Interesting)
You're absolutely right, though. The more "liberal" (really socialist) a country gets, the more it becomes dependant on the government. You can't offer people cradle-to-grave welfare, free education, pretty much guaranteed medical help, etc, etc, without at least a small segment of your society regressing to the point of becoming children in adult bodies. If you then expect those individuals to raise children of their own, you're just asking for problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course! That is why in all the societies which were not "liberal" or "socialist"
Socialism is not the problem. (Score:2)
I'd consider myself a libertarian socialist, socialism is good as long as liberty is maximized.
Socialism without liberty however is just glorified slavery, and this is why I'm not a Stalin socialist Democrat, or a Hitler fascist Republican.
I don't support any party which reduces my quality of life, no matter what the ideology is or the promises they make. I want liberty because it improves my quality of life, and as long as I'm not harming anyone, the government has no moral basis with which to remove my li
Re: (Score:2)
I see what you are saying, but the problem goes like this: the other "libertarians" consider any encroachment on their ability to essentially enslave people economically (or in some cases by means of private gangs, militias, armies and what not) as not acceptable. Their idea of "freedom" is being free to own you. "Survival of the fittest" and all that jazz.
Essentially they want the government to act only as en enforcer for the concept of "private property" and "contracts" governing such. And maybe in charg
Fake libertarians. (Score:2)
Being a libertarian has nothing to do with being a capitalist.
With that being said, yes I prefer the libertarian philosophy of capitalism over the other forms, but only because if it were done right the libertarian form of capitalism is the only form that could ever be considered fair.
It's survival of the fittest under any system. Libertarians just believe in allowing people to compete according to a set of rules which allow for fair competition.
Socialists on the other hand usually raise taxes on the middle
Re: (Score:2)
Which is, to put it gently, a logical fallacy. The "libertarian" form of capitalism is simply a staging ground for takeover by the most greedy and unscrupulous sociopaths. A starting point for feudalism, as in that "system" there is absolutely no provision for stopping a runaway accumu
Re: (Score:2)
Socialism is inherently illiberal. By forcing me to fund your idea of "social welfare", you are taking away my right to use my money (aka, my work, my accomplishments, my abilities) as I see fit. You are, in effect, robbing me. That you happen to be robbing me using government force instead of a gun, and that you are doing it in the name of good intentions, doesn't change the fact that you ARE robbing me.
T
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Aw, little Susy sent out naked pictures to her friends? Great, let's educate her and her parents, ...
How about just minding your own business and not presuming it's your place to 'educate' everyone who doesn't do what you think they should do?
Lets empower parents. (Score:2)
Allow parents to create a list of personal information which can not be posted on Myspace from the IP address of the account of their child.
Also allow parents to access a special portion of the site where they can monitor everything their teenager says on MySpace.
And ISP's can also allow parents to access all the communications logs that are kept for 2 years for whatever purposes.
As long as parents see what their kids are saying online, the parents will have the power to protect them from pedophiles. There
Parents need the technology to do it. (Score:2)
The problem is not going to be solved just by telling parents to supervise the internet.
Yeah if the child is actually a child, as in under 15, then yes the parents should be supervising the internet for them, but what about when they are over 15 and under 18?
How can you have a chatroom or a "space" on the inernet which is not commercial, but which restricts the age limit to 18+? That is the question I'm asking. The law says that 18+ cannot have unrestricted communication with those under 18. The laws are
Re: (Score:2)
You can't. That is the answer I'm giving. And you couldn't even before the popularity of the Internet, with Fidonet and individual dialup bulletin boards.
Then why the legal penalties? (Score:2)
Look, I'd be fine if it wasn't reaching a point where people are being raided by the FBI for clicking illegal hyperlinks, but it has reached that point.
It's time to do something radical technologically in my opinion. It's a lot cheaper to solve this technologically than to let bad laws ruin the internet experience for everyone.
So how do you want to save the internet? I say the best way to do it is to build in technological and legal solutions which limit liability of websites and users of those websites and
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While Facebook might have to provide some responsibility, the 49 states and Columbia should actually tell the PARENTS to supervise their child's usage of the internet.
I'd like to see them implement parental supervision features, so that I can easily review what my kids are doing.
The idea that parents should actively supervise and participate in their children's Internet usage SOUNDS good, but in practice it means two things: I have to spend all of my free time watching what my kids do on the net (leaving me no time for slashdot!), and I have to severely limit their Internet usage.
This is especially problematic for parents with more than one or two children. I hav
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Your kids, your problem. Don't try to screw up the Internet for the rest of us in an attempt to make it kid-safe enough to reduce your workload.
Did I ask for any screwing up of the Internet? I asked for Facebook and Myspace to implement some parental supervision support.
Also, please consider that one day you, too, may grow up and be in my shoes.
Re: (Score:2)
Your kids, your problem. Don't try to screw up the Internet for the rest of us in an attempt to make it kid-safe enough to reduce your workload.
Did I ask for any screwing up of the Internet? I asked for Facebook and Myspace to implement some parental supervision support.
Also, please consider that one day you, too, may grow up and be in my shoes.
Hey, I'm grown up and in your shoes, can I join your conversation?
Your kids, your problem. Don't try to screw up the Internet for the rest of us in an attempt to make it kid-safe enough to reduce your workload.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How about this, try not having more kids than you can actually manage?
Welcome to the modern world, where we have separated procreation and recreation.
I love how people who spew out more spawn than they can support always want to make everyone else suffer along with them.
Boy, your reading comprehension skills need work. I never claimed that I couldn't keep up with the system that I've set up, all I said was that it would be helpful if Facebook, Myspace and similar sites would implement some parental supervision features, to reduce the time I spend spot-checking with VNC.
I did say that other parents who are less technically adept than I am may have significant trouble, but I don't think your puerile argument is very appropriate for them, either.
Supposing, for example,
Re: (Score:2)
Texas, huh (Score:5, Funny)
Hey, it could happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Estimated deficit at
Age of majority (Score:5, Informative)
except (Score:5, Informative)
So, for example, in many places in Europe, the age of majority is 18, but the age of consent is 15. Even in the US, there are state-by-state discrepancies.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well done.
What is the national age of consent? (Score:2)
Instead of having the age of consent be state by state, why don't these federal politicians who want to pass all these internet laws to ban free speech, simply pass one age of consent bill which once and for all sets the age of consent across the entire country?
It's a lot easier to protect children when we actually know what a child is in the eyes of the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, you're wrong. Or, rather, you're partially right: there IS a "2 year difference" rule, but that rule actually LOWERS the age of consent. From the Criminal Code of Canada:
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), where an accused is charged with an offence under section 151 or 152 , subsection 173(2) or section 271 in respect
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
beginning of the end? (Score:5, Interesting)
however, i think this may be the point that we have all been dreading since the internet began -- the day we have to provide *real* identification to get access to casual (non commerce) sites.
i guess the glass-half-full part of me is wondering how facebook can verify age without compromising anonymity (and convenience for that matter).
one way to address this is to not allow unverified people to network with minors (what adults really would, anyway, unless they're spying on them or, well, the pedophiles this system is trying to address). although this is a bit ageist in that this would require minors to provide real id. this doesn't actually address the issue, only postpones full-compliance to future generations. . .
so, yeah. once this becomes commonplace (ie. when the infrastructure is in place), i can see the day when we all have to show our (real) ID at the door of every site we go to.
often it occurs to me that i will be looking back to these days and think, "wow, those were the days when the internet was free," as i hold my nationalIDcard up to the computer screen to be scanned . . .
mr c
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
yes. this is exactly my point. there is no good solution. so 79% of the internet population will suffer to protect 20% from the bad 1%
it just gets dystopian from there . . .
mr c
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook doesn't want anonymous users; they make that quite clear when you sign up.
Why not just create two seperate sites/internets. (Score:2)
A safe internet, designed for minors to access. This internet should require adult verification from their parents allowing their children to access the sites.
And an unrestricted unsafe internet where anything goes. And anyone who chooses to access this internet should be in no position to turn to lawsuits and press charges on people.
The key is, you can't mix the two worlds. The best way to protect minors is to build an internet for minors. The current internet is designed for adults and is unrestricted bec
Re:Why not just create two seperate sites/internet (Score:2)
There are lots of technological ways to do that.
If you are a parent, have kids, and don't want to take care of them yourself, just don't allow them to use the internet. If you don't like the regular one, build a new one!
No one is keeping you from doing that.
There are lots of networks that are not connected to the internet.
Of course, if you want it to work, good luck doing it without freedo
Re:Why not just create two seperate sites/internet (Score:2)
A safe internet, designed for minors to access. This internet should require adult verification from their parents allowing their children to access the sites.
How do we stop the bad people accessing the kiddies' intarwebs ?
Something has to be done.
Indeed. Parents need to start taking some fucking responsibility.
Re: (Score:2)
A safe internet, designed for minors to access. This internet should require adult verification from their parents allowing their children to access the sites.
How do we stop the bad people accessing the kiddies' intarwebs ?
Something has to be done.
Indeed. Parents need to start taking some fucking responsibility.
Why would an adult want to access the kiddie intraweb? Any adult who is trying to access these sorts of site should be investigated immediately.
This will save resources.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would an adult want to access the kiddie intraweb?
Two immediately obvious examples, from both ends of the spectrum:
* Paedophiles
* Helicopter parents
Any adult who is trying to access these sorts of site should be investigated immediately.
Indeed. Heaven forbid parents be able to check up on what their children are doing (or, even crazier, offer some parental guidance), grandparents keep in contact with their grandchildren and an 18 year old date a 17 year old. Imagine the horrifyingly chaotic soc
Re: (Score:2)
Better to investigate than not to investigate and have the entire internet be shut down.
Re: (Score:2)
Better to investigate than not to investigate and have the entire internet be shut down.
Investigate what ?
The "entire internet" isn't going to get shut down, no matter what - and especially not over something as petty and irrelevant as minors and adults hanging around in the same forums.
Re: (Score:2)
The internet will be shutdown on suspicion of kiddie porn and pedophiles. And it's all MySpaces fault.
Re:Why not just create two seperate sites/internet (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This doesn't change the fact that parents have shifted the legal liability on website owners and internet users.
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook has reached an agreement with the attorneys general of 49 states and the District of Columbia to develop and enhance controls to protect minors from inappropriate content.
Where in TFA does it say "that parents have shifted the legal liability on website owners and internet users"? They haven't as far as I can tell. They might want to blame someone else for their own short-comings but I expect that any reasonable court would tell the parents the truth and pull no punches while doing so.
Facebook et al might agree to many things to make life safer for those who are not yet adults, but assuming responsibility for those minors is something that they haven't said they will do
My argument is to empower parents. (Score:2)
Facebook has reached an agreement with the attorneys general of 49 states and the District of Columbia to develop and enhance controls to protect minors from inappropriate content.
Where in TFA does it say "that parents have shifted the legal liability on website owners and internet users"? They haven't as far as I can tell. They might want to blame someone else for their own short-comings but I expect that any reasonable court would tell the parents the truth and pull no punches while doing so.
Facebook et al might agree to many things to make life safer for those who are not yet adults, but assuming responsibility for those minors is something that they haven't said they will do, nor will they ever do so if I'm not mistaken.
If you've been paying attention to the massive sequence of politically motivated legislation and many articles you will see that the laws are designed to shift the blame onto the internet.
When those 8 girls beat up the 1 girl and it was posted on YouTube, the parents did not blame those 8 girls, the parents of the victim blamed YouTube and MySpace. They blame the internet.
If you look at the laws being passed, the laws do not say that minors who enter "adult" chatrooms are liable, or that their parents are
It's set up like this to confuse people. (Score:2)
As far as I'm concerned. It's better to be safe than sorry. Assume 18 is the absolute minimum age, because from a legal perspective, if they are over 18 then you can't be sued as easily.
And I don't think we'd need ID's in every area of the internet. But if you want uncensored communication, because of how vague the current laws are, they can use the current laws to limit your free speech if minors are in the room.
It would be best if minors were not in the room, or if you could have anonymous / secure / priv
Re: (Score:2)
So why are children on facebook, a site which started out as a college oriented adult site?
Sounds like a good idea to me. (Score:5, Interesting)
In my opinion, I see no reason for minors to be using the same social networking services as adults, and in my opinion if they are under 15 they shouldn't be on social networking sites at all.
Can anything good come from letting minors access the adult oriented internet? We don't let them into clubs and bars, so why Myspace and Facebook?
Re: (Score:2)
I think you have to remember that Facebook was started for college students, then extended to high school students. This isn't a case of minors trying to strongarm their way into "the adult oriented internet". It's quite the opposite. If anything, Facebook should probably shut their doors to those not affiliated with a college or h
Tell that to the parents who blame MySpace. (Score:2)
Look, I'm not saying ban all who are under 15 from accessing the internet. If someone is under 15 and their parents give them permission to access the internet, they have every right to access the internet. Their parents should be responsible for monitoring their use of the internet if their parents believe their child has a right to access.
However the current trend is that parents expect MySpace, and adult users of MySpace to change our behavior and protect THEIR kids from the dangerous internet. It's not
Re: (Score:2)
That being said, I prefer letting parents have control. My daughter isn't allowed to use myspace/facebook etc. She'll be 18 soon then she can use anything she w
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously though, I know definitons of such things are moving targets, but I don't know any serious people who consider a site like this a social networking site. I can agree to disagree with people who think it is, but it just lacks so many of the features of said sites (like being able to send messages privately to people or store images/other files on a personal page).
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, his "logic" makes as much sense as most of the things we ban teenage "children" from for their "protection".
/Somewhat more enlightened "old fart" who hasn't forgotten being a teenager.
Re: (Score:2)
Based on the demeanor of your response, it's clear that you're under 15 as well - WAY under 15. So apparently, yes - OP was incorrect in calling you an old anything.
Sound Bite Security (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Bingo! As your kids are growing up, do not give them a computer with net access in their own room. Keep an eye on them; they are in uncharted territory and are learning as they go. Help them learn some of the dangers and pitfalls of the internet.
As they grow up, you can gradually give them more privacy with computer and internet issues (as you should be giving them in other things as well), easing them into "adulthood." I don't understand how people expect an individual that has been sheltered her entire
How do you verify a minor? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent ^ (Score:2)
Brilliant idea.
Thiiiiiink of the Aduuuults! (Score:2)
Whoring out the data of the adults to the commercial partners is just fine!
Posting their private actions to all their facebook mates is just fine!
Facebook are slimy bottomfeeders who don't give a shit about their users.
But then, cui bono ? The users aren't paying Facebook, the advertisers and commercial partners are.
GoodLuckWithThat (Score:4, Insightful)
Age verification technology - how will this work without requiring giving more personal information to facebook, who will then use it to further tail advertisements, could you imagine if they had your postal address?
The only part that makes sense is alerting when minors send information to adults.... but to do that it means monitoring personal communication without a warrant, and how do they really _know_ the child and adult know each other in a non-threatening way, and on the other side, how do they know that they arent relatives or have some other benign relationship... The solution is for parents to be parents and stop letting the computer/tv/playstation/wii parent your kids for you... nobody forced you to become a parent, take some responsibility.
Minors are the exception, adults are the rule... (Score:3, Interesting)
Just add a "Kid Flag" to the browsers. Have the parents set the "Kid Flag" and have sites have to enforce rules around it.
e.g.
If there is a kids flag either the service doesn't work or has reduced functionality.
This allows parents to decide on the what age their kids are wise enough to use said services and puts the power entirely with the parents (as it should be).
Stop trying to get everyone else to be a parent. I mean it seems like teachers, police, equipment makers, service providers, etc all have to be some kind of parent for all these silly like kids that these morons keep dropping into the world.
Frankly the DNA pool might be better if some of the less intelligent kids (or kids with less intelligent parents) got taken out.
Re:Minors are the exception, adults are the rule.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Or even better... have the adult population actually grow up, think rationally for once and realize... it's a computer. It can't kill you (unless you bring it into the bathtub when it's plugged in). It can't hurt you (unless you drop it on your foot). All it can do is expose you to other peoples thoughts and ideas. If being exposed to other people's thoughts and ideas is all it take
Parents are the issue! (Score:2, Insightful)
Just me, BUT (Score:2)
Now because
Then they were unethical (Score:3, Interesting)
Why did they open their product to children anyway?
They should have kept it as an adult college generaton product. I'd probably still be using it if they didn't open it to everyone.
This is both an insult and a waste of time (Score:2)
It didn't take me long to come to the conclusion that the motivation was malice against the young, because after all there was no way that grown people could actually be so collectively stupid as to believe the things they were telling me about how this or that was so harmful to me.
As I grew older I realized that ye
its the new priesthood (Score:2)