This is BS. Parents can do all of these things right now on their kids’ phones. I’ve designed custom Android firmware and an API service for iOS to solve these issues, before they were adopted across iOS and Android devices.
There’s no need for any parent to download a third party parental control app.
Account restrictions and content moderation are completely different technical problems. I’m talking specifically about the controls parents already have on their children’s devices to achieve everything the legislation is supposed to achieve:
1. Restrict apps
2. Restrict websites
3. Block them entirely
4. Control when they’re accessible
You can debate legislation and policy. Whether a device setting performs a specific technical function isn’t a matter of opinion. It either does or it doesn’t.
Lawyers involved in this case debating me on LinkedIn about mobile device technical capabilities and OS settings is like me debating an electrician about whether an apartment complex's electrical controls function as designed. I might have opinions about energy policy, but electrical engineering is not an opinion.
This legislation uses the term “robust” controls because the US has learned from the UK and Australia, where the same language is being used to avoid saying what it actually means: “verify everyone’s identity”.
“Robust” is the important word. It raises the standard, much like adding “best” to “best endeavours”.
🔔 Identity verification is the only way to implement “robust” age verification. You can estimate someone’s age without establishing identity. Australia’s social media ban isn’t working as predicted, so the government is now demanding “robust” measures. That raises the technical requirement from estimating age to proving it.
They won’t say “we want you to verify everyone’s identity” because even parents who support this would stop and question why their own kids have to prove who they are when they reach the “legal age” to access social media.
That’s a sentence I never imagined saying when I co founded the W3C standard for content labelling in 2004 to help protect children, among other use cases.
Ask politicians exactly what they mean by “robust” controls. If they can’t answer, tell them to stop until they can.
None of this has anything to do with child safety. Zuck is taking one for the team (tech companies) financially, but at this scale he might as well have been asked to put a dollar in the swear box.
All it all looks like a plan coming together.
Meta spent three years lobbying to put age checks in the operating system and app stores. States passed laws forcing Apple and Google to build tool but nobody ever passed a law forcing anyone to use it.
Section II.A.5 of this settlement gets that job done.
The reason this route is sneaky is that a settlement has no loser and no plaintiff. So the First Amendment question that blocked these laws in Arkansas, Ohio, Utah, and Texas never gets asked.
Meta has also signed up to sell this idea to others. Snap, TikTok, and YouTube are named in the agreement, and every attorney general permanently forfeits a share of the money to Meta if they can't get all three onto matching time limits.
Jolene by Dolly Parton
The greatest country music singer there was and will ever be. She is loved by all; is such a generous, kind hearted country girl. My favorite program she created was the Imagination Library. In this program a children's book would be mailed for free to kid across the world. I can't sing as good as her, but I wanted to do a karaoke of my favorite song from her. Rest in peace you are our favorite butterfly.
Tim Curry considered the incantation to summon Sarah’s ghost his single favorite line of his entire career.
One of those wonderfully unhinged Tim Curry moments only he could deliver. 🕊️❤️