38 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

No, it really isn't.   Even if it was designed with good intentions (it wasn't) it will have the opposite effect.   YouTube in this example has moderated content.  It's relatively safe.  There is no porn on it.  So if a kid wants to access it or its equivalent then they will use a VPN.  That VPN provider is outside of government control.   It could be provided by a foreign state (Russia, China etc).  That kid then provides their details to that VPN provider.  That VPN provider can see everything that kid does.   Everything that kid does or accesses is invisible to the government (pretending its censorious policy is for keeping kids safe), but transparent to the potentially malicious VPN provider.   VPNs are the gateway drug to the dark web.    So instead of using safe and moderated YouTube content now they are accessing snuff videos and the most extreme, radicalizing content the internet can provide.

 

That's what is wrong with that.   

 

But... but.. but they can outlaw VPNs you say?   Welcome to China, Iran, Russia and North Korea as that is the type of country that outlaws VPNs and are no doubt pretending to their idiot citizens it is for their "kids safety".   

I think it's not just porn but inappropriate content, which could be bulling.

Children can still access the children's part of YouTube.

It is about protecting the kids.

1 hour ago, carlyai said:

The new law is about protecting young children from inappropriate content. 

What's wrong with that?

 

No It's about information control and the slippery slide to  mandatory digital ID

for everyone to access anything !    What's wrong with that ???

1 hour ago, carlyai said:

I think it's not just porn but inappropriate content, which could be bulling.

Children can still access the children's part of YouTube.

It is about protecting the kids.

 

"kids can still access the children's part of YouTube".  And what happens when their favorite creators are made "adult only" as they have made some kind of political statement the government doesn't like?  Then the kid gets the VPN so they can access it.   Then they have access to genuinely adult content (as VPNs bypass any parental controls their responsible parents might have put on with their ISP) and are on the path to the most extreme content the internet can provide.  

 

Kids can get bullied by text message.  Is that banned too?  

 

The lack of foresight into these kind of policies is quite astonishing.   Even if it was intended to protect kids (it wasn't) then it achieves the opposite.  

8 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

"kids can still access the children's part of YouTube".  And what happens when their favorite creators are made "adult only" as they have made some kind of political statement the government doesn't like?  Then the kid gets the VPN so they can access it.   Then they have access to genuinely adult content (as VPNs bypass any parental controls their responsible parents might have put on with their ISP) and are on the path to the most extreme content the internet can provide.  

 

Kids can get bullied by text message.  Is that banned too?  

 

The lack of foresight into these kind of policies is quite astonishing.   Even if it was intended to protect kids (it wasn't) then it achieves the opposite.  

The government didn't act like this because of children control. That's just crazy thinking. Many parents and others complaining about inappropriate content for under 16 year olds on the media platforms. I think I read some young children had suicideed.

 

I haven't seen first hand the damage the content these platforms can do to young children, but I've seen first hand what young people harassing, bullying and pressure can do to other children, so being bullyed and picked on in school, then on their platform at home would be devistating.

 

Also I was asked to sort out an internet/computer problem at a local school that didn't have any censorship. When you opened up the classroom computer a picture of a guy with his member up a girl's rear end came up. Some of the older boys installed the pics on the computers.

Seeing this for young people turning on a computer is not on, so blocking those sites was the way to go.

 

Trying to protect young people from exposure to inappropriate content is not detrimental to their learning experience.

3 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

But banning all social media is 'protecting' them against all content!  Why not let parents control what their children do?  Maybe it's an Australian parenting problem?

Banning inappropriate content for under 16s.

It is a platform and Australian parenting problem.

6 hours ago, BritManToo said:

How could they possibly enforce that?

I have fond memories of Leisure Suit Larry’s age verification questions, though the questions would have to be changed, otherwise anyone under 40 would be declared a kid.

Seems 4 out of 10 young children have complained of inappropriate content.

Hopefully this catches racists trying to post things online whilst trying to hide their identity.

 

The fact you can have men sitting in factories in India and Russia pumping false information all over social media, radicalising British people into becoming racists, and the government doing nothing about it is crazy. 

35 minutes ago, DonniePeverley said:

The fact you can have men sitting in factories in India and Russia pumping false information all over social media, radicalising British people into becoming racists, and the government doing nothing about it is crazy. 

 

The fact that you can have supposedly intelligent adults falling for this removal of their rights and liberties..on the pretext of

"protecting the children"  is what is crazy !!!

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Hopefully this catches racists trying to post things online whilst trying to hide their identity.

 

The fact you can have men sitting in factories in India and Russia pumping false information all over social media, radicalising British people into becoming racists, and the government doing nothing about it is crazy. 

 

You confirm the point I was making that this has nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with censorship and government overreach / authoritarianism.   North Korea et al didn't become totalitarian authoritarian states overnight and I've no doubt that it started with the government de jour implementing something that would "protect the citizens" that garnered support from the idiots.   You clearly like the idea of living in a totalitarian authoritarian hell hole and there are countries that exist already that would meet your requirements.  If the west is too free and liberating for you have you considered relocation to somewhere like China, Russia, North Korea or Turkmenistan so you can live out the dream of being a subjugate?  

13 hours ago, ezzra said:

Too young for TikTok and YouTube but old enough to vote, Nice, makes sense.

The voting age is 18 

2 hours ago, James105 said:

 

You confirm the point I was making that this has nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with censorship and government overreach / authoritarianism.   North Korea et al didn't become totalitarian authoritarian states overnight and I've no doubt that it started with the government de jour implementing something that would "protect the citizens" that garnered support from the idiots.   You clearly like the idea of living in a totalitarian authoritarian hell hole and there are countries that exist already that would meet your requirements.  If the west is too free and liberating for you have you considered relocation to somewhere like China, Russia, North Korea or Turkmenistan so you can live out the dream of being a subjugate?  

 

 

Nonsense of the highest order. There are laws in place to protect against racism, sexism, discriminatory behaviour. It's inacting these laws. 

 

What you have now is players hiding their indentity and being openly racist. 

 

Then the other problem is foreign players radicaling the British working class with flase information. 

 

We already take very large action against radicalisation in the muslim community. You only have to talk to white british men in Pattaya to see the levels of false information and radicalisation they are under. 

We are in Thailand where we have to submit our passport details to get a sim - this does happen in most western countries like the UK.

 

Perhaps you need to pipe down with the 'freedom' talks. 

 

Freedom is basically a want to be racist. 

11 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Freedom is basically a want to be racist. 

A clockwork orange..anyone ?

Total hypocrisy compiled under the guise of 'protecting children'. When I was a kid in school in the late 1940s and early 1950s there was plenty of porn being passed around in the form of postcard sized pics in black and white, produced in France. Kids have always found a way to access this kind of material, and always will.

On 7/31/2025 at 3:29 AM, Gsxrnz said:

Just another level of soviet style government nanny state intrusion into the disappearing family unit. A strong family unit and social unity are the enemy of the state.

 

Big Brother knows what's best for you, all hail Big Brother. 

 

Big Brothers? You mean Marc, and Jeff, and Elon and the likes?

 

You can't buy alcohol or fags till you're 18 the same should hold true for 'social' media. It's just as addictive, toxic and harmful to young brains. Banning it is about caring for kids and society. 16 seems like a reasonable age limit.

 

Those robber baron empires should have long been broken up but they've bought up all the pols.

 

Go Oz!