UK Social Media Ban May Lock Out More Than 100,000 Teens Without ID (theguardian.com) 62
Under the UK's planned social media ban, more than 100,000 British teenagers aged 16 and 17 could initially be locked out of social media because they lack a passport or driving license that may be needed as a fallback for age verification. The Guardian reports: Ofcom, the UK's online watchdog, said about 150,000 16- to 17-year-olds do not own a passport or driving licence, which are likely to be needed to access age-restricted platforms. The Australia-style ban on under-16s accessing social media services, including Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, is due to come into force next spring. The head of Ofcom, Melanie Dawes, said "motivated children" would seek to bypass the restrictions, as has happened in Australia.
On Thursday, Ofcom published an assessment of age verification measures that could underpin the ban, outlining four "highly effective" methods: checking a person's official ID against a live selfie, a bank verifying an account holder's age, an official digital ID service like the Young Scot card, or estimating someone's age via a selfie. However, the watchdog said a form of official ID would probably be needed as a "backstop" for other methods, such as facial age estimation, which could be inaccurate by several years. Ofcom said a cohort of 16- to 17-year-olds could miss out as a result. "This means that people without a form of photo ID will likely need to take steps to obtain one to access age-restricted services," the regulator said. The report notes that more than nine out of 10 Britons over 16 have passports or driving licenses.
"We should expect that motivated children will seek to bypass the restrictions -- just like alcohol laws can't completely eradicate underage drinking -- but there'll be ways for platforms to mitigate this risk," said Dawes. "This will be a huge cultural shift for our society, so it'll take time to adjust, and everyone will have a part to play."
On Thursday, Ofcom published an assessment of age verification measures that could underpin the ban, outlining four "highly effective" methods: checking a person's official ID against a live selfie, a bank verifying an account holder's age, an official digital ID service like the Young Scot card, or estimating someone's age via a selfie. However, the watchdog said a form of official ID would probably be needed as a "backstop" for other methods, such as facial age estimation, which could be inaccurate by several years. Ofcom said a cohort of 16- to 17-year-olds could miss out as a result. "This means that people without a form of photo ID will likely need to take steps to obtain one to access age-restricted services," the regulator said. The report notes that more than nine out of 10 Britons over 16 have passports or driving licenses.
"We should expect that motivated children will seek to bypass the restrictions -- just like alcohol laws can't completely eradicate underage drinking -- but there'll be ways for platforms to mitigate this risk," said Dawes. "This will be a huge cultural shift for our society, so it'll take time to adjust, and everyone will have a part to play."
Start a new Internet (Score:4, Funny)
This one is fucked, we should throw it away and start over. A free network that isn't based around trying to harvest market research data and constantly trying to sell things.
Re:Start a new Internet (Score:4, Interesting)
A free network that isn't based around trying to harvest market research data and constantly trying to sell things.
If it's free, how are you going to stop people from using it to make money off you, in both honest and dishonest ways?
Re: (Score:3)
By having a terms of service that prohibits it and collecting enough identifying information to identify specific individuals, and also requiring identity-derived credentials to access the network.
Aww crap.
Re: (Score:3)
either way the fight goes we lose...again.
Re: (Score:1)
This one is fucked, we should throw it away and start over. A free network that isn't based around trying to harvest market research data and constantly trying to sell things.
The internet started as a network among Universities. As in those places we've always paid a metric fuckload of money to in exchange for an education and access.
The reality of that premium digital data network, is it was never truly free. Ever.
And if "free" is now the metric, society will be enslaved to the next version. Be careful what you wish for.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Internet2 (Score:2)
What happened to that?
Re: (Score:2)
It's been tried many times. Freenet is one example, back in the day. Onion sites on Tor. It never works, unfortunately.
Oh no! (Score:2)
I can only wonder in horror at what kind of even worse mind-rot shit the next generation will complain about their youth spending all day on.
Re:Oh no! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Oh no! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is the baby-steps to killing online anonymity. You start with the children. Don't even bother with current adults. Once the current children produce children, those adults will be much easier to sucker into ID for online as they are already accustom to it.
And there you have it. A changing of social norms in a mere 10-15 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely correct. I have watched it happen twice in my lifetime:
-When I was in highschool, the older kids could smoke. There was a smoking area on campus, but incoming years were not allowed. Within a few years, there was no smoking allowed on campus.
-When my son was in highschool, they phased out letting students leave campus for lunch. Again, starting with the incoming freshmen class. Within a few years, it was a closed campus from morning to end-of-day.
This change will take longer, but it will bec
Re: (Score:1)
And there you have it. A changing of social norms in a mere 10-15 years.
Remember you have a fucking lawyer to thank for that. Not 'society'.
No citizen demanded you get pop-up notifications about cookie collecting on every website. It was for-profit litigation that did that.
Re: (Score:1)
The problem is adults have to doxx themselves to not lose their accounts. And given the broad scope, you should expect just about all platforms to be covered eventually -- from YouTube to Slashdot.
(Society) I don't give a flying fuck, about 'accounts'. Because it ultimately means nothing to me.
When the level of effort to capitalize on capitalism exceeds the burden, NO ONE will give a fuck. And it's long past time social media greed feels the slippery slope social media greed created.
No. I haven't been asked about my Slashdot contributions in any interview. Neither has anyone else. Yes. That does define the true value of it.
Re: (Score:1)
there was that movie, Trainspotting.
I do not hope you will get what it's about, but I hope.
Keep 100,000 teens off social media? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Won't someone think of the children?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Authoritarianism (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Facebook is not the town square. It's the private event venue full of recording equipment monetising everything you say to outsiders while feeding you highly suggested content and turning your mike off if they feel what you say isn't aligned with what people wanting to hear.
There is something truly authoritarian here, and it's great that a lot of people will be spared from being subjected to it thanks to the UK government.
Maybe, (there is hope), maybe some of these locked out people will go to an actual tow
Re: (Score:1)
Where is the town square then?
Re: (Score:2)
Where is the town square then?
The rest of the internet. Either that or maybe there isn't actually a town square anymore. There are towns without a square where all buildings are owned by someone and there's no dedicated public place to gather and talk.
The internet is a vast and free place. Maybe if we teach people how it works we can get some of that freedom back, but make no mistake, there are precisely zero neutral social media sites out there. Case in point: Your post is currently a 0 because someone deemed AC posts to be "less valua
Re: (Score:1)
The rest of the internet? You mean what? Like Slashdot and other forgotten relics of the pre-social media era?
Social media is the de facto online town square because that's where the people are. To pretend differently is like trying to argue that your front lawn is now the physical town square.
Re: (Score:1)
No I mean like the open network that routes data from A to B with complete neutrality. I mean like your ability to run decentralised communication on open protocols. I mean your ability to serve content across a network without anyone's algorithm saying otherwise.
Social media is the de facto online town square because that's where the people are.
No it's not, it's a school hall with the principal deciding which conversations are allowed, and which get squashed. It's the Agile meeting where the scrum master decides what is important to share and who should shut the fuck up. It's the carefull
Re: (Score:2)
The argument here should be about the principles of censoring young peoples' access to the online world
Oh great, you're starting to get the point. Maybe we should have a town square then instead of controlled and curated speech that is current social media.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool. Now try getting even a fraction of the userbase of Facebook onto your "decentralised communication on open protocols".
I didn't realise the town square had goalposts. Next time if you want to talk about a football stadium do that.
Hint: People not coming to hear what you say is not a free speech issue. Your local town square also doesn't have most of the town their either.
Social media is the de facto town square because that's where the people hang out
And you continue to use that term incorrectly. It's a de-facto shopping mall, because that's where people hang out... if they are allowed to stay, don't make a ruckus and security don't kick them out.
Just hanging out somewhere doesn't make it a town square.
Re: (Score:1)
Facebook is not the town square. Where is the town square then?
First of all (and I do mean FIRST), have you actually asked the local leaders of your Town where the Square is?
If you haven't, you've just discovered the first failure of your own hypocrisy. Yes. Town squares do still exist. Most in the exact same place they were 100 years ago. Just because they're museum artifacts now, doesn't mean they can't be used for their original purpose.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, (there is hope), maybe some of these locked out people will go to an actual town square and have their opinions heard unfiltered instead.
Like in France?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, or in one of the many countries with peaceful protests. Why do you mention France specifically? What agenda are you trying to push?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No they don't. Even in France you can go into a public square and say what you want to whomever will listen. Only if your congregation turns into an active nuisance is there any enforcement action.
Now here's the rub, on Facebook if what you say doesn't align with the algorithm you'll be shadow silenced, your post not promoted, potentially even hidden without you knowing. Want to reach an audience? Well you can just pay to be heard.
Social media isn't a public square, it's a for profit event venue.
Re: (Score:2)
Even in France you can go into a public square and say what you want to whomever will listen. Only if your congregation turns into an active nuisance is there any enforcement action.
Only if your congregation turns into an active nuisance does anyone actually listen. Actually mostly not even then.
Re: (Score:2)
once we got this first part working, though, why wouldn't we extend it everywhere to save EVERYONE from kiddie porn?
Re: (Score:1)
why wouldn't we extend it everywhere to save EVERYONE from kiddie porn?
Because what would republicans masturbate to? Gotta keep them busy somehow, god knows it's worse for everyone if they actually pass legislation.
Re: (Score:2)
If anyone feels bad for these teens (Score:2)
Then maybe you could look around, tech is sucking everyone in for ad revenue. If you have a problem with tech doing this to teens then dummy geek bar for them. Countless generations of teens have thrived without social media.
Who cares? Quakenet and Freenode are still ... (Score:2)
... around and will still be when all the "commercial Social Media" nonsense has gone the way of the Dodo.
I see nothing wrong with forcing teens to get to know some IT basics and learn to run their own IRC node or webforum. It's the way better way to do things anyway.
So? (Score:2)
No domestic non-driver ID in UK (Score:2)
Last I checked a few years ago, the United Kingdom offered no domestic non-driver ID. It offers only a driving licence, which requires access to a motor vehicle and probably paying someone to let the learner practice driving in their vehicle for some number of hours, or a passport, which is valid for international travel but expensive. If this has changed, let me know.
Re: (Score:3)
Using a corporate website that may or may not spread your message depending on its content and the promotion of a for profit algorithm has nothing to do with "free speech". You're still entitled to say what you want. Maybe you'll even go say it somewhere which isn't filtered.
... about to get fake IDs (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
they will mandate that the IDs are actually checked against a government database
TFA is about legitimate users who very much should just go and get real IDs linked to a government database, something they'll need within the next 2 years anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Fake IDs, virtual fake IDs, etc.
Congrats on not understanding what's going on. What on earth makes you think someone will go to the effort to get a fake ID when instead they could just get a real one, something they'll need to do anyway.
Re: (Score:1)
Teens have worked around restrictions since parenting has existed. Fake IDs, virtual fake IDs, etc. It's not going to be hard to get around any of this shit. It never has been. It never will be.
The reason to get a fake ID today, involves crossing a moral and legal line most would not cross in order to get alcohol (which is clearly not popular among teens) and/or drugs (which they're already medicated. Have been since single-digit age.)
Yes. That is correct. The majority of teens, do NOT have an illegal fake ID.
It's stupid to assume most teens will go get an illegal fake ID simply because "social media" when the peer pressure to get a fake ID today isn't enough to convince the majority. You're go
Re: (Score:2)
Teens have worked around restrictions since parenting has existed. Fake IDs, virtual fake IDs, etc. It's not going to be hard to get around any of this shit. It never has been. It never will be.
And it's a useful life skill!
It will lock out everyone... (Score:1)
British people please advise. (Score:1)
British people please advise.
Is Ofcom the next incarnation of the muppet show? Because it delivers on par sans Kermit.
Hardly (Score:2)
NOBODY has an ID-card in the UK, just like the US.
The kids will wear grey hair pieces and draw a moustache or whatever to make the look older, just like in Australia.
Re: (Score:2)
NOBODY has an ID-card in the UK
WTF are you talking about, I literally don't know a single adult without one, given you need one to open a bank account, travel, drive a car, use government services. Way to go showing to the world you don't know what the UK is. Were you thinking about a different country by any chance?
What ID do non-drivers use? (Score:2)
WTF are you talking about, I literally don't know a single adult without one, given you need one to open a bank account, travel, drive a car, use government services.
What ID do Brits use if they use public transport instead of a motor vehicle?