Under-16s will be banned from using social media, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced.

Starmer says social media is making children unhappy, making it easier for bullies to abuse children, and is “designed to be addictive”. A ban would give children more time, security, and more freedom to grow up - as well as more opportunities, he adds.

“That is all any parent wants. They want to know that Britain will be better for their children, that they will get a fair chance,” the PM says in a speech in Downing Street.

Starmer adds that the government is “not prepared to compromise” on the safety and happiness of children - and that includes in the regulation and enforcement of this ban. He says the government has listened to and learned from countries like Australia, where a similar ban has already been introduced.

  • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Really interesting they push for that the day of the report of investigation regarding rape gang and how the gouvernement didn’t protect children en even enable harm toward them. Trully disgusting. Really hope they get prosecuted by the next gouvernement

  • abc@suppo.fi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I fully support the battle against attention-consuming energy vampires but I’m afraid this is probably not going to work practically.

    • Virtvirt588@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I agree, but on the ageism point. The thing that needs to be done is regulation so that manipulative design is reduced. Its the corporations that are the problem. Bans only target the victims the most.

      • Soup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Consequences for rich people? Not blaming their victims?!? Who the fuck do you think you are, anyway??

  • adam_y@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 hours ago

    How do you get an entire population of adults to voluntarily scan their faces and submit them to Palantir?

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      8 hours ago

      No it wouldnt. It’d be a .001% reduction in users.

      If you want social media to become a ghost town, ban bots/AI

      • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Can they even do it? AI nowadays can reliably parse captchas, present themselves as adults, with little effort they’ll even present documents and “real” photos

        • abc@suppo.fi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Full digital ID. Then the only for AI to get in is to steal a real human’s identification.

          Many civilized countries already have some system like this in place for critical stuff like banking, online healthcare, etc.

        • MortUS@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          They could but it’s symbiotic. Social Media churns engagement using bots, which generates ad revenue.

          Not to mention that large Social Media companies like Meta are almost certainly filtering out bot content to train LLMs on.

          • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            They obviously don’t want to do it. But my point is that I think they actually can’t.

            I mean Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Cloudflare definitely can’t filter real people from AI. Documents photos, real time videos, those are even easier for AI to fake than to the real people to make them.

            That brings us to the good old sms to a physical sim card purchased in a real shop with human face and document check. And that also will be spoofed in like 6 months.

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          I mean if people can figure out bot accounts and make lists of them just by looking at them, I’m pretty sure the companies that see 25000 accounts all connect from the same IP address can figure it out.

          • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            if people can figure out bot accounts

            That’s a big IF and most of the times they don’t.

            25000 accounts all connect from the same IP address

            That’s just not how it works.

  • mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    14 hours ago

    It’s insane that they’ll say it’s designed to be addictive, and then just let the company keep doing that. Like maybe go after the entity producing the addictive substance directly then?

    • ziproot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      The engagement-based algorithmic feed is the problem. Kids being able to talk to strangers is also an issue, but that isn’t because of addiction, and I personally think public chats should just be opt-in with the expectation that the parents will actually do their job and teach their children not to talk to strangers.

    • sunbeam60@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      All social media is designed to be addictive, though. It’s their entire business model.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        and a large part of that is the up/down vote systems, and other gamifications of human interaction.

        And they’ve spread out of social media into many other website types.

        All it does is extremify human interaction and is a major component in why we’re at the point we are right now with right wing extremism and fascism on the rise.

        Get rid of these systems, and let people just communicate with eachother without having to appeal to a hive mind to tell people who gave up thinking if somethings good or bad based on votes/reactions/etc

          • lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            That’s the problem with this panic. Everybody is using a different definition of social media. You and the other guy don’t hate social media, you hate Meta, X, and TikTok. And the government hates that too but also defines the Fediverse and forums in general, plus video games and anywhere else you might talk to another human being as social media as well.

            So if you’re on a social media site like Lemmy or Piefed and you’re complaining about how evil and addictive social media is, the government is going to read that and think “My god! This poor person is in trouble! They’re screaming for my help! I must pass a law to ban Lemmy and liberate Derpgon from they’re horrible addiction to the Fediverse! That’s what Derpgon wants!”

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Its a webforum, not a social media.

          Social media is places that revolve around shit in your real life no one cares about. Facebook, Instagram,Tiktok,Etc.

    • lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I think it’s insane because social media is addictive because being social and communicating with fellow human beings is addictive. That’s what you and me are doing here and why we find it so pleasurable. That is not a bad thing.

      It’s a bizarre lesson to drill into our children’s brains that this is a negative thing. I assume they don’t really know what social media is and see it as distinct, more like the one way communication of comic books, rock n roll, and other media moral panics, and they assume children will too. But what will happen to the next generation is that they will see all forms of human interaction as horribly addictive, amoral, and unhealthy.

  • AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Anything to avoid parents actually … parenting their children. Just like making weed illegal stopped everyone from smoking it! :D Same with alcohol.

  • youmaynotknow@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Funny how this is being imposed on the population at large, but the same politicians pushing it are exempt. So self-sacrificing that they will put their children and grandchildren in peril to protect ours. They’re heroes.

    • sunbeam60@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I think there’s a rational argument for saying anonymous social media is what Russia, China and other dictatorships use to undermine and affect public opinion, to be fair.

      I’m not saying therefore anonymity shouldn’t be allowed. I’m just saying there’s a nuance here…

      • FlyingCircus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Homegrown capitalists and the states they control are far more profligate and effective at social media manipulation than either Russia or China. Don’t forget that it was Facebook and Cambridge Analytica that made Brexit happen, not Russia or China. Although I guess you did say dictatorships, so that includes the dictatorship of capital that rules the west.

        • sunbeam60@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Myeah, sure, maybe, maybe not. But whatever the source, anonymity does enable well-resourced actors to affect opinion change.

      • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        anonymous social media is what Russia, China and other dictatorships use to undermine and affect public opinion

        You talk from the past. Nowadays bots are less anonymous than real people.

      • Avicenna@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        It will only be deanonymised for UK citizens though (and any other country that applies some sort of ID verification). Any Russian LLM bot can still spread lies in the internet claiming to be from the UK so no problem solved there.

        Worst yet, today it is deanonymisation “because think of the children”, tomorrow it is putting people who say “Free palestine” in social media to prison.

  • Babalugats@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    If they wanted to do it properly they could take a leaf out of the pages from STOKITI or EDRI - but they don’t want to do it properly. They just want to seem like they are doing something, while gathering data and profiteering at the same time. I would imagine Starmer and the rest of them have wet dreams about this shit and wake up with sticky cotton pyjamas every morning.