Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.misc,nz.general,aus.computers
Subject: Re: Banning Social Media For Under-16s
Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 01:43:33 +1000
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <op.26o7avkvbyq249@pvr2.lan>
References: <10044na$30sk8$1@dont-email.me>
 <1f7f2kl88kh74u5r8c1hs0cb9rnmhsq162@4ax.com>
 <m8qb78Fpko5U11@mid.individual.net> <op.26ob3hudbyq249@pvr2.lan>
 <m8reakFqvjlU10@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
X-Trace: individual.net yk14FJfN9GTZDH2S7I4PGQC3k/Ihlv3qeBFLGto7ZengO/8u8=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:RoSu8kK48lEOFUxZ8PNNtwl96FU= sha256:zPZLAv+jX2SGt3cufLaKy9AQDS15UEmCYGR/kaStKb0=
User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)
Bytes: 3401

On Sat, 17 May 2025 22:38:44 +1000, MightyMouse  =

<squeak!@cheesefactory.com> wrote:

> Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 May 2025 12:39:36 +1000, MightyMouse  =

>> <squeak!@cheesefactory.com> wrote:
>>
>>> BR wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 15 May 2025 07:22:18 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>>> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Australia has put in place a law to ban access to social media for=

>>>>> under-16s, and New Zealand is looking to follow suit. Here is an
>>>>> interview, by Samantha Hayes of Stuff, of the =E2=80=9CPremier=E2=80=
=9D (as the
>>>>> Aussies insist on calling the state Chief Ministers in their
>>>>> Federation -- don=E2=80=99t they know that =E2=80=9CPremier=E2=80=9D=
 is shortened journalese
>>>>> for =E2=80=9CPrime Minister=E2=80=9D?) of South Australia, Peter M=
alinauskas, the
>>>>> instigator of the Aussie law
>>>>> <https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360690772/one-thing-architect-au=
stralias-social-media-ban-under-16s-would-do-differently>.  =

>>>>> One of our local pro-right-wing-wannabe parties insists the law wo=
uld
>>>>> be =E2=80=9Cunworkable=E2=80=9D. Yes, Malinauskas admits that bans=
 on underage
>>>>> smoking, drinking and now social media are never 100% effective. B=
ut
>>>>> they greatly reduce the incidence of the activity, and that is wha=
t
>>>>> leads to harm reduction.
>>>>>
>>>>> Certainly, relying on the social media companies to police themsel=
ves
>>>>> is never going to work. Because if it had worked, we would have se=
en
>>>>> the results, after more than 20 years of their activities. The fac=
t
>>>>> that things are, if anything, worse now than when they started, sh=
ows
>>>>> the uselessness of trusting them.
>>>> Banning under 16s from social media will be impossible unless some
>>>> sort of digital ID is issued to everyone and which would be require=
d
>>>> for internet access.
>>
>>> and so we march ever onward towards microchip implants
>>
>> Fantasy
>>
>
> people are already doing it

EVERYONE isnt and isnt even doing that for their pets
even tho that is a legal requirement and no govt would
ever be stupid enough to require that for internet access
and complete trivial to bypass that even if they did

>>>>   This legislation is insidious and must be opposed
>>>> at every opportunity.
>>>>
>>>> It is up to parents to supervise their children's online activity, =
not
>>>> politicians.
>>>>
>>>> Bill.
>>>>
>>>
>