Don’t say “Congress”. Say “Republicans”.
The bipartisan bill is also supported by the right-wing Heritage Foundation
Vice, you keep saying “bipartisan”, but then you don’t prove your point with left-wing groups that are supporting it.
Plenty of Democrats support this anti-LGBTQ+ bill – here’s the list of cosponsors. It really does have bipartisan support!
Shhh, you’re spoiling the narrative.
Generally meaning all republicans and one democrat.
President Biden on KOSA: “Pass It, Pass It, Pass It”
It’s a very poor attempt by people who don’t know how to use the technology to regulate it. Ask anyone who actually knows how to ever restart their Wi-Fi how they would protect “the kids” and they can come up with better ideas
One more reason we would do better with specialists for each field being responsible for the laws regarding said field, with some kind of synthesist organizing. It doesn’t have to be a technocracy, we could do it democratically, but we can’t keep going with these 70 year old politicians trying to make laws for things they can even define let alone understand.
The least they could do is bring back the Office of Technology Assessment to help them understand things:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Technology_Assessment
deleted by creator
I think Hanlons razor is apt here: never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
Here’s a simple idea, require all sites that kids access to have a second email address that gives access to chat logs, so that concerned parents can know what their kids get up to, and smart kids can route around the issue.
The challenge there is that in situations with abusive parents the kid is in even more danger.
Smart kids just sign up with two of their own email addresses, but yeah, abusive controlling parents will always be an issue. They’re an issue without the internet. Adding internet to it doesn’t turn non-abusive people into assholes, it just lets them attack their children from a new angle.
What I’m saying is, you cannot fix abusive parents without using CPS. The real answer to abuse is giving kids more tools to report it.
Right, but if a young child is unaware of this and they reach out for help on a monitored platform they’re gonna find themselves in an even worse situation.
Party of small government people…
Also, parents need to understand technology better than their children. Parental controls are easy to set up and manage on all devices. Dont ruin the internet for everyone because you can’t take the time to parent.
“online safety”
The fact this is a bipartison bill should have everyone concerned, and figuring out who exactly is supporting this bill, and when is their relelection coming up.
Who are the authoritarian ones now? As a European, I start seeing differences between our western and eastern neighbours grow thinner and thinner…
Out of curiosity, I went ahead and read the full text of the bill. After reading it, I’m pretty sure this is the controversial part:
SEC. 3. DUTY OF CARE. (a) Prevention Of Harm To Minors.—A covered platform shall act in the best interests of a user that the platform knows or reasonably should know is a minor by taking reasonable measures in its design and operation of products and services to prevent and mitigate the following:
(1) Consistent with evidence-informed medical information, the following mental health disorders: anxiety, depression, eating disorders, substance use disorders, and suicidal behaviors.
The sorts of actions that a platform would be expected to take aren’t specified anywhere, as far as I can tell, nor is the scope of what the platform would be expected to moderate. Does “operation of products and services” include the recommender systems? If so, I could see someone using this language to argue that showing LGBTQ content to children promotes mental health disorders, and so it shouldn’t be recommended to them. They’d still be able to see it if they searched for it, but I don’t think that makes it any better.
Also, in section 9, they talked about forming a committee to investigate the practicality of building age verification into hardware and/or the operating system of consumer devices. That seems like an invasion of privacy.
Reading through the rest of it, though, a lot of it did seem reasonable. For example, it would make it so that sites would have to put children on safe default options. That includes things like having their personal information be private, turning off addictive features designed to maximize engagement, and allowing kids to opt out of personalized recommendations. Those would be good changes, in my opinion.
If it wasn’t for those couple of sections, the bill would probably be fine, so maybe that’s why it’s got bipartisan support. But right now, the bad seems like it outweighs the good, so we should probably start calling our lawmakers if the bill continues to gain traction.
apologies for the wall of text, just wanted to get to the bottom of it for myself. you can read the full text here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/1409/text
It’s plain retarded that this is being news like this. It’s a law to control content on the internet and can be used to censor pretty much anything they think it’s not good for children.
Where are the petitions to reject this garbage
Lying snake politicians: THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
Kids (on YouTube kids): hahaaaa uggy wuggy an freddie fezber go BRRRRRRRRRRRR
This neutered internet can go suck a dick. Hate speech is free speech. I’m so over censorship as an American.
