As New York Finalizes New Social Media Rules, US Senate Considers Nationwide 'SCREEN' Act (eff.org) 15
New York has finalized new rules that will govern social media apps in the state starting on January 25, 2027. The law prohibits social media platforms from sending notifications to minors between midnight and 6 a.m. without parental consent. And minors "will only be shown content from other accounts they follow or otherwise select in a set sequence, such as chronological order," rather than "the default algorithmically personalized feeds... unless they get parental consent for an addictive feed." (Social media companies "must offer at least one alternative method for age assurance besides providing a government-issued ID," the announcements points out, and any information used to determine age "must not be used for any other purpose and must be deleted or de-identified immediately after its intended use.")
But meanwhile, the EFF writes that a committee in the U.S. Senate is considering the SCREEN ACT, "a sweeping age-verification bill that would require online services to verify users' ages before they can access any sexually explicit content. If this bill passes, it will force millions of adult internet users to give up their anonymity, privacy, and security before they access lawful speech." Unlike many state-age verification laws — which have been harmful in their own right — the SCREEN Act has no requirement that a significant portion of the website consist of sexually explicit content that is harmful to minors. The bill requires nearly any service hosting even a single piece of sexually explicit content to verify the ages of its users. The result is that the bill would apply not only to adult content sites like PornHub or OnlyFans, but also streaming services like Netflix, and social media platforms like Reddit, Discord, or Bluesky, if they host any adult content...
Under the SCREEN Act, the "bouncer" will be a digital age-verification service that captures your personal information and saves it to a database for an unspecified amount of time. The consequences of the bill won't be limited to minors. If websites and apps are expected to reliably identify teenagers, adults will be asked to prove they are adults. Even worse, the SCREEN Act is a privacy and data security nightmare. One provision of the bill requires services to take reasonable steps to protect the data collected and to not maintain for longer than is necessary. But these are terribly weak protections that impose no meaningful collection, use, or retention limits on services collecting people's private information...
The SCREEN Act also targets virtual private network (VPN) users and providers. The bill requires covered websites to verify users' ages based on their IP addresses unless the service can determine that the user is outside the United States, and specifically requires age verification on traffic coming from known VPN addresses. In practice, this discourages the use of VPNs and proxy servers, which millions of people rely on for legitimate purposes such as protecting personal privacy, securing public Wi-Fi connections, safeguarding journalists and activists, and preventing data tracking...
The SCREEN Act creates onerous age-verification rules that will block adults from accessing lawful speech, curtail their ability to be anonymous, and jeopardize the data security and privacy of all internet users.
But meanwhile, the EFF writes that a committee in the U.S. Senate is considering the SCREEN ACT, "a sweeping age-verification bill that would require online services to verify users' ages before they can access any sexually explicit content. If this bill passes, it will force millions of adult internet users to give up their anonymity, privacy, and security before they access lawful speech." Unlike many state-age verification laws — which have been harmful in their own right — the SCREEN Act has no requirement that a significant portion of the website consist of sexually explicit content that is harmful to minors. The bill requires nearly any service hosting even a single piece of sexually explicit content to verify the ages of its users. The result is that the bill would apply not only to adult content sites like PornHub or OnlyFans, but also streaming services like Netflix, and social media platforms like Reddit, Discord, or Bluesky, if they host any adult content...
Under the SCREEN Act, the "bouncer" will be a digital age-verification service that captures your personal information and saves it to a database for an unspecified amount of time. The consequences of the bill won't be limited to minors. If websites and apps are expected to reliably identify teenagers, adults will be asked to prove they are adults. Even worse, the SCREEN Act is a privacy and data security nightmare. One provision of the bill requires services to take reasonable steps to protect the data collected and to not maintain for longer than is necessary. But these are terribly weak protections that impose no meaningful collection, use, or retention limits on services collecting people's private information...
The SCREEN Act also targets virtual private network (VPN) users and providers. The bill requires covered websites to verify users' ages based on their IP addresses unless the service can determine that the user is outside the United States, and specifically requires age verification on traffic coming from known VPN addresses. In practice, this discourages the use of VPNs and proxy servers, which millions of people rely on for legitimate purposes such as protecting personal privacy, securing public Wi-Fi connections, safeguarding journalists and activists, and preventing data tracking...
The SCREEN Act creates onerous age-verification rules that will block adults from accessing lawful speech, curtail their ability to be anonymous, and jeopardize the data security and privacy of all internet users.
This already exists (Score:3)
Under the SCREEN Act, the "bouncer" will be a digital age-verification service that captures your personal information and saves it to a database for an unspecified amount of time.
Some sites already require the use of ID.me [wikipedia.org] -- like the IRS, SSA and Medicare, the latter two also allow Login.gov [wikipedia.org]. Here are 77 Companies that use ID.me in United States [theirstack.com]
Not trying to give them ideas, just sayin' ...
You're assuming that's not the point. (Score:2)
At this point, I've stopped giving politicians the benefit of the doubt. If they support regulations that look like they have the potential to drag the United States into becoming an authoritarian hellhole, I assume that they're actually trying to do just that. It makes it a lot easier to convince myself to vote for another candidate in every election afterwards, even if that candidate isn't as good in other areas, because at least the other candidate isn't trying to destroy our basic freedoms.
Look up th
Re: (Score:2)
At this point, I've stopped giving politicians the benefit of the doubt. If they support regulations that look like they have the potential to drag the United States into becoming an authoritarian hellhole, I assume that they're actually trying to do just that. It makes it a lot easier to convince myself to vote for another candidate in every election afterwards, even if that candidate isn't as good in other areas, because at least the other candidate isn't trying to destroy our basic freedoms.
Look up the sponsors of the bill, and vote against them from now on, whether it's a primary or a general election. Repeat until ousted.
Currently, all the cosponsors are Republicans - 26 on the House bill and 4 on the Senate bill.
(Links to bills noted here [slashdot.org].)
Re: (Score:1)
At this point, I've stopped giving politicians the benefit of the doubt.
Born yesterday, I presume?
Pretentious backronym (Score:2)
From the actual House/Senate bills:
This Act may be cited as the “Shielding Children's Retinas from Egregious Exposure on the Net Act” or the “SCREEN Act”.
[rolls eyes, *sigh*]
I'll take Republicans for $100 Alex. (Score:2)
As of this posting, the SCREEN Act bills are cosponsored solely by how many of this political party.
What is 26 Republicans in the House and 4 Republicans in the Senate?
H.R.1623 - SCREEN Act [congress.gov]
S.737 - SCREEN Act [congress.gov]
Disney is not an option (Score:2)
Government-enforced monopoly (Score:2)
What are the responsibility of this service? Accurate verification: I doubt it? The "bouncer" is guessing if it doesn't have access to Passport/state DMV records. "Best practices" cyber security: Not likely? Without banking laws or HIPPA, it costs too much. Protecting the privacy of third-party customers: Obviously not?
This a third-party doing the government's job of 'protecting' other third-parties (children). It doesn't work for health insurance and student loans, it won't work for age-verifi
protecting children from sex (Score:1)
If the Feds want to protect children from sex, why don't thy start by telling the DoJ to prosecute the Epstein bros instead of protecting them?
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I think government jobs should have a 37 month limit. If you want to work at a government job, fine, but you get a month of training followed by 36 months of work and then you can never work for the government ever again. We should also insist that congress repeal all of the laws providing for any kind of retirement benefits for government jobs. No retiring from government jobs. Only the current jobholders (elected, appointed, or hired) can get any benefits. Eventually, they'll all pass away
I can imagine (Score:2)
"notifications to minors between midnight and 6 a.m. without parental consent. "
I hereby notify you of my consent that my daughter Myriam can receive notifications between midnight and 6 PM.
s) My mother