While I dislike social media, this ban is as stupid as Australia's laws enforcing bicycle helmets.
Will this mean I will have to register as my real name on Hacker News? Not a chance
> Will this mean I will have to register as my real name on Hacker News?
First of all, age verification shouldn't mean the social media provider gets true identities. They shouldn't be trusted with that info. There needs to be services that allows verifying your age against one service, and the media service just getting the receipt of that verification. Whether such a service exists already or not shouldn't matter. The law should be written so that social media companies are restricted in what they can do when they can be sure someone isn't a minor, and when they are sure. For extra safety, perhaps it should say they can't be allowed to see for example physical ID:s. Because otherwise you'd risk privacy issues.
Second, I think it's better to formulate these laws the way the new york draft did: that specific features are restricted for minors. Such as: enless media feeds based on past behavior (such as any video "shorts" feeds in all the major platforms today).
You're damn right, same as the law enforcing seatbelts, cars head and brake lights, ABS, testing of tap water quality, testing of food quality, &c.
I want absolute freedom to get utterly fucked by the first mega corp or dumbass who want to do it !!!
I've fallen off a bike before and my helmet definitely saved me from a serious head injury. Would I have worn one if it was not compulsory and drilled into me as a child that's what you do when you ride one? Maybe not.
It saved me that day and I expect it saves many people in this country every day too.
Yes. Because this is a false dichotomy. The latter does not depend upon the former. I can say that with certainty because I received the message growing up in a country with a cycling proficiency programme in schools instead of mandatory helmet laws.
Everyone should wear a helmet when riding, but criminalising noncompliance is an inefficient, reductive, expensive, heavy-handed, unnecessarily punitive, and ultimately counter-productive approach to achieving it.
So is controlling what and how much people can eat to prevent or reduce obesity.
From now on, you are only allowed to eat broccoli (I actually love broccoli) to ensure you will not be a burden on the public health system.
https://www.iihs.org/topics/pedestrians-and-bicyclists/bicyc...
In a society it's not fair for your selfish actions to have a negative effect on everyone else.
Are you planning to ban all snowsports? Horse riding? They produce similar or higher levels of injury and disability even with helmets.
>it's not fair for your selfish actions to have a negative effect on everyone else.
If negative externalities are the metric we're evaluating what is and isn't allowed in our society, you're really going to take a pass at cyclist helmets instead of cars? Do you know what the leading cause of child death in Australia is? It's cars