Hacker News Reader

Comment by sonicrocketman | Hacker News Reader

Am I missing something? Services are allowed to collect the data they need to perform their essential function right? (my reading says yes)

This just says: don't collect info on children you don't need and assume people are protected unless you verify otherwise.

Just don't collect the info you don't need. Seems straight-forward to me.

View on HN

The intent seems to plug the hole in COPPA, where a service could pretend they are not marketed at children and avoid all the requirements, even though they know a lot of children (or even a majority of children) use their service. For example, social media platforms.

Now you need to take steps if "A significant amount of the audience [...] is determined, based on internal company research, to be children."

I don't see anything about requiring every site to check if every visitor might be a child and keeping that personal information for compliance. I don't know where this rhetoric comes from.

yeah but how they prove you aren't a child, for a child safe default internet ???

The bill says that if the site can't prove that their user is an adult then they apply the same safety standards to everyone.

I might have missed that part of the bill, do you have a quote?

If I read this correctly: if you aren't collecting the info (for ads, etc) you don't need to verify anything. A non-tracking, non-data surveillance website is fine.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com