just as long as they dont require digital ID from everyone.
What’s the argument against a ban? I don’t see a downside to banning social media for kids. In theory they would be forced to build in-person social connections and local communities. After 16 they can expand into the social media space. Personally, I think it should be tied to something like drinking age.
It depends how it will be implemented. Do you want to send your ID to Facebook etc.? Or do you want to make a video call before you can use a social media site? Will only the big players be required to keep your age verification details, or will each forum, each Fediverse site be required to gather and keep your personal ID?
So the only arguments against the ban come down to how to perform the age verification and not issues with the ban itself. That makes sense. Maybe we could institute some kind of one time passcode where it’s like an MFA for age. Like picture your passport can generate a hash (unidirectional) that just contains like month and year of birth and is verified via PGP with the passport issuing body as the cert authority. So the only actual information you are sending is a hashed and cryptographically verified month and year of birth. That should probably make everyone happy.
Build in person social connections?
Think of the shareholders! I mean, think of the children who will have to go through that awful process!
- In practice the same system can be used for banning people from social media and communications. Shadow bans etc. Other use in future may be social score.
- What’s legal today, may be not legal tomorrow. People will be self censoring.
- This gives more leverage for older people over young people, let’s not pretend: people are selfish.
I was against these kind of policies, but now that I saw Elon’s position I’m reconsidering.
My logic: The enemy of a paedophile is a friend of kids.