On Mar 27, 2023 at 6:52:10 PM PDT, "RichA" <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:

> I wonder how this will play out?
>
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65060733

This is just silly and another example of Republicans alienating Gen Z for no
good reason.

These laws are so easily circumventable that they're pointless, so Republicans
push an entire generation toward the Democrats for no gain whatsoever.

As soon as this Utah law passes, look for the entrepreneurial 19-year-old on
every block to start charging $20 a pop to create Twitter accounts for all the
under 18s in his area. Just create the account-- no verification of age or
identity necessary for adults-- and then hand the account name and password
over to the 15-year-old for $20 quatloos.

Boom. Law circumvented and that 15-year-old is going to vote Democrat in three
years.

And unlike alcohol, it's not a crime for a minor to be in possession of a
Twitter account, nor could the cops enforce it even if it was a crime. What
are they gonna do? Stop every kid and demand to see his/her social media apps
and somehow deduce if the accounts have been created with parental consent or
not?

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:33:52 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>On Mar 27, 2023 at 6:52:10 PM PDT, "RichA" <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I wonder how this will play out?
>>
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65060733
>
>This is just silly and another example of Republicans alienating Gen Z for no
>good reason.
>
>These laws are so easily circumventable that they're pointless, so Republicans
>push an entire generation toward the Democrats for no gain whatsoever.

Do they really think they can force every social media company to
implement these changes. Especially the time lock so that kids can't
access any social media between 22:30 and 6:30. It's not like a lot
of these sites have a Utah presence so they could send law enforcement
by to arrest someone if the company ignored the laws. Hell, many don't
even have a US presence so good luck getting them to listen to your
Utah laws.

Even if they could enforce this all it would mean is each company
would look at the number of visitors coming from Utah and decide to
implement a geo-block so no IP registered to Utah would be able to
access their site. No more problem and any kid (or adult) with the
least bit of technical know how would find out about VPNs and work
around the block by appearing to come from another state.

>As soon as this Utah law passes, look for the entrepreneurial 19-year-old on
>every block to start charging $20 a pop to create Twitter accounts for all the
>under 18s in his area. Just create the account-- no verification of age or
>identity necessary for adults-- and then hand the account name and password
>over to the 15-year-old for $20 quatloos.
>
>Boom. Law circumvented and that 15-year-old is going to vote Democrat in three
>years.

I assume these laws are being proposed in order to curry favor with
their Republican voters. Depending upon the makeup of their state it
may be a reasonable choice for now. In the long term you are likely
right that this sort of action against kids will turn many of those
kids against them.

>And unlike alcohol, it's not a crime for a minor to be in possession of a
>Twitter account, nor could the cops enforce it even if it was a crime. What
>are they gonna do? Stop every kid and demand to see his/her social media apps
>and somehow deduce if the accounts have been created with parental consent or
>not?

It's only going to come up if someone suspects the kid is underage and
reports them. It's the same thing as with Twitch where no one under
the age of 13 is supposed to be on the platform. They still end up on
the platform and , if found out, get removed. No other action is taken
and nothing prevents them from creating another fake account. I see
the same thing happening here even if it involves a third party
creating the new accounts.

That reminds of the idea that many businesses are asking for all of
the social media accounts of new employees. How are they going to know
that they have such accounts. In my case none of my accounts use my
own name so if I were to give such an employer a real account that I
created with my own name and never use, who is going to know the
difference? Also what employer is going to bother checking said social
media accounts beyond when an employee first applies or is hired?

On Mar 28, 2023 at 11:05:08 AM PDT, "shawn" <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:33:52 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mar 27, 2023 at 6:52:10 PM PDT, "RichA" <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder how this will play out?
>>>
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65060733
>>
>> This is just silly and another example of Republicans alienating Gen Z for no
>> good reason.
>>
>> These laws are so easily circumventable that they're pointless, so
>> Republicans
>> push an entire generation toward the Democrats for no gain whatsoever.
>
> Do they really think they can force every social media company to
> implement these changes. Especially the time lock so that kids can't
> access any social media between 22:30 and 6:30. It's not like a lot
> of these sites have a Utah presence so they could send law enforcement
> by to arrest someone if the company ignored the laws. Hell, many don't
> even have a US presence so good luck getting them to listen to your
> Utah laws.
>
> Even if they could enforce this all it would mean is each company
> would look at the number of visitors coming from Utah and decide to
> implement a geo-block so no IP registered to Utah would be able to
> access their site. No more problem and any kid (or adult) with the
> least bit of technical know how would find out about VPNs and work
> around the block by appearing to come from another state.
>
>> As soon as this Utah law passes, look for the entrepreneurial 19-year-old on
>> every block to start charging $20 a pop to create Twitter accounts for all
>> the
>> under 18s in his area. Just create the account-- no verification of age or
>> identity necessary for adults-- and then hand the account name and password
>> over to the 15-year-old for $20 quatloos.
>>
>> Boom. Law circumvented and that 15-year-old is going to vote Democrat in
>> three
>> years.
>
> I assume these laws are being proposed in order to curry favor with
> their Republican voters. Depending upon the makeup of their state it
> may be a reasonable choice for now. In the long term you are likely
> right that this sort of action against kids will turn many of those
> kids against them.
>
>> And unlike alcohol, it's not a crime for a minor to be in possession of a
>> Twitter account, nor could the cops enforce it even if it was a crime. What
>> are they gonna do? Stop every kid and demand to see his/her social media apps
>> and somehow deduce if the accounts have been created with parental consent or
>> not?
>
> It's only going to come up if someone suspects the kid is underage and
> reports them. It's the same thing as with Twitch where no one under
> the age of 13 is supposed to be on the platform. They still end up on
> the platform and , if found out, get removed. No other action is taken
> and nothing prevents them from creating another fake account. I see
> the same thing happening here even if it involves a third party
> creating the new accounts.

The thing about this law that is really going to chap people's asses is that
it will require *everyone* who creates an account to prove their age/identity,
not just the kids, otherwise it won't work because the kids will just lie and
say 'yes' to the "Are you over the age of 18?" question during the set-up
process. So even the adults will have to submit some kind of proof of age--
likely a photo of their DL or something like that-- to prove they *aren't* a
minor.

On Tuesday, March 28, 2023 at 2:32:15 PM UTC-4, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2023 at 11:05:08 AM PDT, "shawn" <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:33:52 +0000, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mar 27, 2023 at 6:52:10 PM PDT, "RichA" <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I wonder how this will play out?
> >>>
> >>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65060733
> >>
> >> This is just silly and another example of Republicans alienating Gen Z for no
> >> good reason.
> >>
> >> These laws are so easily circumventable that they're pointless, so
> >> Republicans
> >> push an entire generation toward the Democrats for no gain whatsoever.
> >
> > Do they really think they can force every social media company to
> > implement these changes. Especially the time lock so that kids can't
> > access any social media between 22:30 and 6:30. It's not like a lot
> > of these sites have a Utah presence so they could send law enforcement
> > by to arrest someone if the company ignored the laws. Hell, many don't
> > even have a US presence so good luck getting them to listen to your
> > Utah laws.
> >
> > Even if they could enforce this all it would mean is each company
> > would look at the number of visitors coming from Utah and decide to
> > implement a geo-block so no IP registered to Utah would be able to
> > access their site. No more problem and any kid (or adult) with the
> > least bit of technical know how would find out about VPNs and work
> > around the block by appearing to come from another state.
> >
> >> As soon as this Utah law passes, look for the entrepreneurial 19-year-old on
> >> every block to start charging $20 a pop to create Twitter accounts for all
> >> the
> >> under 18s in his area. Just create the account-- no verification of age or
> >> identity necessary for adults-- and then hand the account name and password
> >> over to the 15-year-old for $20 quatloos.
> >>
> >> Boom. Law circumvented and that 15-year-old is going to vote Democrat in
> >> three
> >> years.
> >
> > I assume these laws are being proposed in order to curry favor with
> > their Republican voters. Depending upon the makeup of their state it
> > may be a reasonable choice for now. In the long term you are likely
> > right that this sort of action against kids will turn many of those
> > kids against them.
> >
> >> And unlike alcohol, it's not a crime for a minor to be in possession of a
> >> Twitter account, nor could the cops enforce it even if it was a crime. What
> >> are they gonna do? Stop every kid and demand to see his/her social media apps
> >> and somehow deduce if the accounts have been created with parental consent or
> >> not?
> >
> > It's only going to come up if someone suspects the kid is underage and
> > reports them. It's the same thing as with Twitch where no one under
> > the age of 13 is supposed to be on the platform. They still end up on
> > the platform and , if found out, get removed. No other action is taken
> > and nothing prevents them from creating another fake account. I see
> > the same thing happening here even if it involves a third party
> > creating the new accounts.

> The thing about this law that is really going to chap people's asses is that
> it will require *everyone* who creates an account to prove their age/identity,
> not just the kids, otherwise it won't work because the kids will just lie and
> say 'yes' to the "Are you over the age of 18?" question during the set-up
> process. So even the adults will have to submit some kind of proof of age--
> likely a photo of their DL or something like that-- to prove they *aren't* a
> minor.

Yep.

Didn't see that coming, like government surveillance, LOL

On Tuesday, March 28, 2023 at 2:32:15 PM UTC-4, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2023 at 11:05:08 AM PDT, "shawn" <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:33:52 +0000, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mar 27, 2023 at 6:52:10 PM PDT, "RichA" <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I wonder how this will play out?
> >>>
> >>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65060733

> The thing about this law that is really going to chap people's asses is that
> it will require *everyone* who creates an account to prove their age/identity,
> not just the kids, otherwise it won't work because the kids will just lie and
> say 'yes' to the "Are you over the age of 18?" question during the set-up
> process. So even the adults will have to submit some kind of proof of age--
> likely a photo of their DL or something like that-- to prove they *aren't* a
> minor.

tags: nostr, fug 'em

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 11:32:01 -0700, BTR1701 wrote:

> On Mar 28, 2023 at 11:05:08 AM PDT, "shawn"<nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:33:52 +0000, BTR1701<atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mar 27, 2023 at 6:52:10 PM PDT, "RichA"<rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I wonder how this will play out?
> > > >
> > > > https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65060733
> > >
> > > This is just silly and another example of Republicans alienating Gen Z for no
> > > good reason.
> > >
> > > These laws are so easily circumventable that they're pointless, so
> > > Republicans
> > > push an entire generation toward the Democrats for no gain whatsoever.
> >
> > Do they really think they can force every social media company to
> > implement these changes. Especially the time lock so that kids can't
> > access any social media between 22:30 and 6:30. It's not like a lot
> > of these sites have a Utah presence so they could send law enforcement
> > by to arrest someone if the company ignored the laws. Hell, many don't
> > even have a US presence so good luck getting them to listen to your
> > Utah laws.
> >
> > Even if they could enforce this all it would mean is each company
> > would look at the number of visitors coming from Utah and decide to
> > implement a geo-block so no IP registered to Utah would be able to
> > access their site. No more problem and any kid (or adult) with the
> > least bit of technical know how would find out about VPNs and work
> > around the block by appearing to come from another state.
> >
> > > As soon as this Utah law passes, look for the entrepreneurial 19-year-old on
> > > every block to start charging $20 a pop to create Twitter accounts for all
> > > the
> > > under 18s in his area. Just create the account-- no verification of age or
> > > identity necessary for adults-- and then hand the account name and password
> > > over to the 15-year-old for $20 quatloos.
> > >
> > > Boom. Law circumvented and that 15-year-old is going to vote Democrat in
> > > three
> > > years.
> >
> > I assume these laws are being proposed in order to curry favor with
> > their Republican voters. Depending upon the makeup of their state it
> > may be a reasonable choice for now. In the long term you are likely
> > right that this sort of action against kids will turn many of those
> > kids against them.
> >
> > > And unlike alcohol, it's not a crime for a minor to be in possession of a
> > > Twitter account, nor could the cops enforce it even if it was a crime. What
> > > are they gonna do? Stop every kid and demand to see his/her social media apps
> > > and somehow deduce if the accounts have been created with parental consent or
> > > not?
> >
> > It's only going to come up if someone suspects the kid is underage and
> > reports them. It's the same thing as with Twitch where no one under
> > the age of 13 is supposed to be on the platform. They still end up on
> > the platform and , if found out, get removed. No other action is taken
> > and nothing prevents them from creating another fake account. I see
> > the same thing happening here even if it involves a third party
> > creating the new accounts.
>
> The thing about this law that is really going to chap people's asses is that
> it will require *everyone* who creates an account to prove their age/identity,
> not just the kids, otherwise it won't work because the kids will just lie and
> say 'yes' to the "Are you over the age of 18?" question during the set-up
> process. So even the adults will have to submit some kind of proof of age--
> likely a photo of their DL or something like that-- to prove they *aren't* a
> minor.

And just like that, Usenet becomes illegal!

On 2023-03-28 2:05 PM, shawn wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:33:52 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mar 27, 2023 at 6:52:10 PM PDT, "RichA" <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder how this will play out?
>>>
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65060733
>>
>> This is just silly and another example of Republicans alienating Gen Z for no
>> good reason.
>>
>> These laws are so easily circumventable that they're pointless, so Republicans
>> push an entire generation toward the Democrats for no gain whatsoever.
>
> Do they really think they can force every social media company to
> implement these changes. Especially the time lock so that kids can't
> access any social media between 22:30 and 6:30. It's not like a lot
> of these sites have a Utah presence so they could send law enforcement
> by to arrest someone if the company ignored the laws. Hell, many don't
> even have a US presence so good luck getting them to listen to your
> Utah laws.
>
> Even if they could enforce this all it would mean is each company
> would look at the number of visitors coming from Utah and decide to
> implement a geo-block so no IP registered to Utah would be able to
> access their site. No more problem and any kid (or adult) with the
> least bit of technical know how would find out about VPNs and work
> around the block by appearing to come from another state.
>
>> As soon as this Utah law passes, look for the entrepreneurial 19-year-old on
>> every block to start charging $20 a pop to create Twitter accounts for all the
>> under 18s in his area. Just create the account-- no verification of age or
>> identity necessary for adults-- and then hand the account name and password
>> over to the 15-year-old for $20 quatloos.
>>
>> Boom. Law circumvented and that 15-year-old is going to vote Democrat in three
>> years.
>
> I assume these laws are being proposed in order to curry favor with
> their Republican voters. Depending upon the makeup of their state it
> may be a reasonable choice for now. In the long term you are likely
> right that this sort of action against kids will turn many of those
> kids against them.
>
I don't think that necessarily follows. If the law is so easily
circumvented, the inconvenience of doing so is negligible as is the
resulting drive to vote against the party that instituted it.
>
>> And unlike alcohol, it's not a crime for a minor to be in possession of a
>> Twitter account, nor could the cops enforce it even if it was a crime. What
>> are they gonna do? Stop every kid and demand to see his/her social media apps
>> and somehow deduce if the accounts have been created with parental consent or
>> not?
>
> It's only going to come up if someone suspects the kid is underage and
> reports them. It's the same thing as with Twitch where no one under
> the age of 13 is supposed to be on the platform. They still end up on
> the platform and , if found out, get removed. No other action is taken
> and nothing prevents them from creating another fake account. I see
> the same thing happening here even if it involves a third party
> creating the new accounts.
>
>
> That reminds of the idea that many businesses are asking for all of
> the social media accounts of new employees. How are they going to know
> that they have such accounts. In my case none of my accounts use my
> own name so if I were to give such an employer a real account that I
> created with my own name and never use, who is going to know the
> difference? Also what employer is going to bother checking said social
> media accounts beyond when an employee first applies or is hired?

--
Rhino