As I am over 16, does it mean I have to prove that I am over 16? To me, this Legislation is back door Legislation to bring in a Digital Identity Bill. What's bad also is the bloody stupid Liberal and more stupid Nationals that support this Bill.

On a more general note: Technology, computers and the internet is not a benign system like a child's toy. Misuse of these systems has real consequences like driving a car or a plane or owning a firearm. Used incorrectly real damage occurs. . Yet we hand children and even adults this capability with no training and no safety instruction. Click click on the screen trigger and hope it doesn't go bang. Would you give your children the keys to your high performance motor vehicle without training and a licence?

Thanks for attempting to explain the bill :) > First and foremost this is an issue of "social education" rather than technology use. As are most internet (technology) issues. . Next to make the internet safe via direct preemptive policing requires a complete redesign of how the internet works from the ground up. This means replacing every internet capable device across the planet with a completely new way of utilizing technology world wide. This is unlikely to ever happen. > This bill is asking the platform providers and internet to enact preemptive safe measures and policing which our current technology is not capable of. It's like asking a car manufacture to protect the driver from choosing the wrong store to shop at. Or asking the store to stop the customer from using the hammer they purchased from hurting someone. It just doesn't work that way :) > Blocking certain social media platforms just tempts people (young) to go to less reputable platforms. Remember the internet is an open anonymous information sharing system. That is the way it is designed at it's core. Anyone with the smallest amount of knowledge can set up a chat site, shared forum or any other form of communication very quickly without the need for dedicated providers. I can do this in less than 5 mins using my current google email account on google. > There is a potential of using an anonymous digital ID system for all site accounts and logins instead of a name. Essentially providing identification via warrant after a law has been broken. This is what we currently have in place in everyday society. *This has no resemblance to the current proposed digital ID system.* Remember in Australia you already have a digital ID if you use the internet. Your phone MAC ID is recorded/registered against your name when you purchase it. If you get an internet connection your name is recorded against that account and primary email address. The problem is that the internet is World Wide and not all nations have rules, so it is easy to create pseudo accounts for platform login. . You need to A. change the rules for every nation. Not going to happen. Or B. separate all internet platform activity from the world, but users will still use overseas platforms. So that's not going to happen. > The other option which is the most historical used is to run all underage devices via an administrator controlled kiosk where only "whitelisted" internet addresses are allowed. This can be done at both the (locked) device as well as via an online kiosk access platform. "Citrix" is a secure kiosk system used by governments and businesses as an example. There are many kiosk system that control what a user has access to. > But at the end of the day there is no technology fix for this. The only genuine solution is improved social education and education more generally as well as accountability for bad behavior.

𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗛𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗥𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝟭𝟵𝟴𝟲, 𝗔𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲 𝟭𝟵 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗵 𝟮..... 𝗘𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗼𝗺 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻; 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗲𝗲𝗸, 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗮𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘀, 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗲𝗿𝘀, 𝗲𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆, 𝗶𝗻 𝘄𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗻𝘁, 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝗿𝘁, 𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗮 𝗼𝗳 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗶𝗰𝗲. Let’s not forget history the first thing when a gov starts tyranny, it starts with censorship and indoctrination of youth. Look at what the nazis did for Hitler’s youth as one example.

This is about digital ID surveillance.

The answer to false opinions and claims is more opinions and claims not fewer.

The people who come up with this rubbish are obviously not to be trusted as far as we can theow them. They can't think themselves out of a paper bag.

"Fact checkers" are little more than propaganda departments. The Community Notes advisory section on X strikes a balance in that it doesn't claim to be objective but does provide both affirming and contradictory evidence.

There was a time when simply being a government sponsored publication would be enough to reassure you of the veracity of the claims the document makes. These days the government's impremature is a signal to be suspicious and resentful.

Bloody cheek give us 48hours and a couple of sides of an A4 sheet of paper. Surely this is a wholly inadequate consultatuon.

Good luck to Canberra trying to muzzle the wealthiest man in the world. The fact we will have to prove who we are is putting a tracker on us all. Skynet here we come. All that money spent on the NBN for nought simply because they want to attach a leash to every adult in the country.

How can we Possibly STOP THIS.. how is this legal for them to do ?

They are CONSTANTLY determined to make us a totalitarian Country by Any & EVERY means....

"Fuelung conspiracy theories" - you makes people suspicious and resentful of unwarranted government intrusion into people's private lives?

What documentation will people require to prove their age? An ID card perhaps?

Any statute that leaves discretion up to "the minister" is asking for trouble. Who do they rhink they are? If there is an objective means to identify something then that is what the legislation should identify. If the definition of the power is up to the minister to make we are signing away our democracy to dictatorial powers.

Why can't they stop phones in school, Since so many hours are spent there, plus the distraction it causes. What they do at home is the parents responsibility. It's not the job of Government.

I believe ways around these bills would already exist.. Critically harsh bullying already exists on messaging apps.. Also any discord irc snap chat.. It's up to you the parent to know if your child is being manipulated online... It happens to adults also.... You stop your kids from doing drugs and being abused by the local gangs? That's all online now.. Be a parent!! Excuse me..? Penalty units?.. Social credit score? Excuse me.. Pardon?...

I used to be for removing anonymity. Then I realised many users live in countries ruled by authoritarians who like to harass, jail & kill dissenters, including dissenters online. I don’t like the idea of of requiring identification for everyone anymore, including in Australia where increasing political tribalism is resulting in social harms to people who don’t subscribe to current orthodoxies - see the trans rights vs women’s rights debate.

Bullying occurs everywhere outside of social media. 👹👹 Blaming social media is a distraction for the real problem of poor parenting. Govts will not and never will protect your children. 😱😱😱😱😱😱

4:00 , i feel personally attacked haha. How do the courts justify having the donation limit for an election cycle higher than the lifelong earning of the average person? Its clearly providing an extremely small amount of people far more influence than probably 80% of Australians. It's clearly supporting a corrupted process. Although i guess that depends on what you think the intent of representative government. Maybe we should go back to only landowners being able to vote 😂

It sad if kids hobbies like music and art is at risk

This is not just for kids it’s for everybody.

Another issue i have with this legislation is that it provides a mechanism for uneven fact-checking in order to promote a narrative. The decision of whether something something is misinformation is obviously not clear cut and to some degree is down to interpretation. A "fact checker" could have a preferred narrative and be far more sensitive to contentious information that contradicts their narrative. Thereby censoring inconvenient opinions. Also, what's the penalty for uneven censorship? Legacy media is heavily biased so why wouldn't social media "fact-checkers" also be? Are social media companies going to pay 6 figure salaries for highly skilled people from STEM fields, medicine, law? Or graduates from low quality degrees from the social sciences? The reason this legislation is bad has little to do with law and all to do with practical application.

Anyone looked into the Murdoch news corp starting up a “kids news” platform🤔🤔🤔 nothing to see here

Kids are bullied at school. They are exposed to harmful words from other students. It’s not safe. I propose all children are home schooled until the age of 18. A ridiculous idea? It certainly is, but it’s rationale is not too different than the proposed bill. And the actual harm will be to the children.

Anything the government claims is 'for your safety' should be resisted.

Bizarrely a 15 year old social media journalist @benderbijofficial was the only one to bring us truthful media coverage of the Amsterdam football hooligans. I think this was poetical justice to our government falling for misinformation peddled by large media with extreme bias. Without social media our kids would have lost all forms of connection during covid times.

The Political Finance reform Bill has brought outrage from High-profile political donor and Climate 2000 convenor and creator Simon Holmes a Court What hypocrisy from a Billionaire who attempted to rig the electoral process to assist his Financial Interests His only interest was to get elected. He was what we call the Teals, whose only interest was to ensure his interests were protected and not those issues affecting Australians. Court’s Climate 2000 Politicians will finally faced scrutiny for Simon Holmes a Court's significant financial contributions

How is this legal ? What can we the public actually do to stop it?

The essence is that the author every post on "social media" is identified by a GovID. That also implies reads, interactions, reactions and other expressions of thoughts, views and opinions.

Simply put, our government don’t represent us. They represent their own interests in maintaining power and the interests of those who help them maintain power. In the modern world there are very few differences between western governments and your average dictatorship.

It's a trap. To bring in digital ID. Anyone who falls for this is stupid.

Excellent thank you for sharing your knowledge

So what if people say bad things that hurt your feelings? That's such a boomer attitude. The important thing for us to do is to limit the government's capacity to restrict free speech, which is exactly what they want to do. The outcome of this legislation would probably mean that everyone would need to prove their identity to use the internet. A really handy requirement now that the government now is looking at creating an Orwellian department of truth. Remember that you dont actually have to successfully sue or fine someone to shut them up, you just need to be able to impose legal costs. That is enough to cause self-censorship.

I'm stunned at your willingness to accept any restrictions on our freedoms.

It's actually much worse than a bill that would allow direct censorship or even arrest of people. At least that would be out in the open. Its lack of transparency in hiding behind big tech to do the censoring is what really makes it very sinister

Should we put kids in a bubble until they are 18, then let them out into a world you can’t navigate, or do we let parents parent and let them teach their children how to live in the world?

How about vaping? Kids can access that and cause harm to themselves.

As if reported the coronation (due to low network TV attention spans) was reduced from 4 hours to one hour a lot of touching of these things would no doubt save time. For the same reason I believe the anointing behind screens rather than retiring to a special chapel.

One point at 11min 30s in: you can have ID verification with anonymous or pseudonymous posting. Given the US founding fathers themselves were writing pseudonymously, as did Kierkegaard, Voltaire, Lewis Carrol, George Orwell and many female writers, we can't really assume that ID verification would lead to visible identification of comments. Just that there'd be easier recourse against speech. If pseudonyms were made illegal, then in essence you're removing capacity for selective disclosure of identity. To me this is a major privacy concern (would usernames in a game be valid? would nicknames on facebook be?) and a free speech issue (due to chilling effects).

I'm sorry, but this is government overreach. This bill is about making everyone use a digital ID to access the internet, not children's safety. If they were concerned about the safety of children, they would stop pushing puberty blockers and experimental medical procedures at them. Besides, surely there is an app that allows a parent to control what their child consumes and accesses online. The government should have no say in how we raise our children. Less government, more freedom!!!

The Gov can't be honest or transparent as to tip off the actual reason why this bill is so important. This Bill to ban or limit the age of social media is more to do with Gov Security. Infiltration of online indoctrination of radicalism which could spontaneously manifest into a full blown anti Gov takeover or shutdown. This Gov is taking the over precautionary step of assuming control before the threat or event even takes place.😳🤔

I don't care what anyone says. This is simply a back door entry for the government to introduce digital ID on the whole population. The government is overstepping the mark. It's the parent's job to monitor what their kids are watching on the web.

It’s not about under 16s. Everyone and I mean everyone will need to provide age verification. It’s digital ID and surveillance by stealth. These people are crooked.

I am very amused by the idea of young people watching the Clarion to protest government policy!

I’m not committing a crime by posting a comment under a different name. I just don’t want my business or family to suffer because I may have a different opinion OR decide to share it. Even Elon Musk making liking posts on twitter has allowed people to express their opinions without being shamed or canceled by the internet. I like your content and regardless of whether you are mainstream or controversial, my watching, liking or commenting shouldn’t mean I’m forever tarred with the brush of authority over it. If I was of a culture or religion or employment or government that was authoritarian then I’d be silenced because I would be easy to find. Can you not see that? Or is that the whole idea…?

Ministry of Climate, Ministry of Men, Ministry of Truth and, of course, Ministry of Love.

Rather disingenous to sight malicious intent as the only reason for wanting anonymity, in light of the current political climate in the West. So tragic to see political prisoners (of speech) in the Motherland. 😢😡

Anything they want to ‘push past’ like this is completely dodgy! & unacceptable! As you explain it’s got so many holes in it’s not funny