To think the internet should be a little more controlled...

[jobhunter7]

It shouldn't be possible to access hardcore pornography so easily...
It shouldn't be so easy to troll people...
There should be more controls before things go live to the entire universe...

I'm not front line, don't worry - I'm project managing.

I do think that's best by your attitudes.

But do I think people need to have some level of toughness?

Which I have agreed on but yet you still keep raising as if I'm disagreeing with ?

I have two DDs, who have both been bullied at school. And just for grins, while I was doing dinner, I asked them how they would feel about providing full identifiable ID to the services they use online. Their reply is unprintable. I'd like to see young people polled about this idea of yours; I reckon the response wouldn't be one you'd like.

I disagree, I know many who would feel a lot safer on platforms knowing everyone had been verified.
but non the less sadly what's best for children is not always known to them, which is why they

And you haven't answered any of my questions, you've just given me snarky emojis and idealism, nothing practical
Absolutely it was practical, with a few emojis thrown in for the points you keep missing.
Non have been snarky at all.

Lastly, travel permits are much older than people think - they were used in England as early as 1215, and the Romans also used travel documents. Safe conducts were in widespread use from around 1500 onwards. If you're proposing to give Internet ID those kind of timescales, I suppose it might work. Any time soon? Not so much.

No, I'm not looking at these sorts of timescales as its a massive issue now that is only getting worse, so I think it needs to be tackled sooner rather than later.

Any answers on the method of ID questions posed above yet?

I'm not sure which question you asked that I missed?

OK, so we're resorting to person attacks now. I feel a bit bullied here....

I'm asking about the practical considerations raised by others because you seem to be extremely keen to answer me, but not so keen to answer them. I wonder why that is.

In terms of teenagers and their ability to decide what is best - perhaps you should look at the legislation around valid informed consent. Teenagers get quite a lot of autonomy around medical decisions, starting quite young. So not involving them in making decisions around one of the pillars of their lives seems a bit... unethical.

StanfordPines I can see the market in fake IDs becoming a bit of a boom territory if this is ever brought in, can't you?

I can see the market in fake IDs becoming a bit of a boom territory if this is ever brought in, can't you?

Not only that but a huge number of spoof websites set up that mimic a log in for a well known site and ask you to confirm your ID.

OK, so we're resorting to person attacks now. I feel a bit bullied here

Bullying is not one instance or observation.

I'm asking about the practical considerations raised by others because you seem to be extremely keen to answer me, but not so keen to answer them. I wonder why that is.

No need to wonder, I will explain, I was keen to answer you, as you were the one I was conversing with and you me ? So it wasn't a concern you had during the 2days this conversation has covered, but now someone else had mentioned it, you think it is a vital part to your discussion when your main part of the discussion previously has been personal responsibility for their own wellbeing.

It's a tad strange you are pushing me into a discussion with other people, it's almost as if have seen your reasoning for your dislike of the idea is slightly flawed other than "I don't like the idea"

In terms of teenagers and their ability to decide what is best - perhaps you should look at the legislation around valid informed consent. Teenagers get quite a lot of autonomy around medical decisions, starting quite young. So not involving them in making decisions around one of the pillars of their lives seems a bit... unethical

Yes teenagers (I don't know the age of your children obviously ) opinions are considered on certain aspects of the law as they are deemed capable to make certain decisions for themselves and their own best interests. But there are also a whole hosts of legislation and rules that sadly they are not including in the making of and this may fall under that. Although most I know would feel safer, for the few who don't this may be some of the "individuality" they have to "give up to be part of a society"

OK, so now I'm going to ask you, because you're conversing with me - how, in practical terms, would you implement ID requirements for Internet use?

My comment about feeling bullied may have been ever so slightly tongue in cheek. But that comment about my attitude was rude. However, I'm pretty tough and I can handle it.

StanfordPines an excellent point about the greatly increased hazards of phishing with this idea.

Still no answer on the practical aspects.

OK, so now I'm going to ask you, because you're conversing with me

Completely missing the point that it wasn't even a consideration or in your reasoning for over 2 days but jumps on it as if it is your reasoning and demanding an answer.

how, in practical terms, would you implement ID requirements for Internet use

There are already many eID checkers and ID authentication softwares that are used and a variety of ways of helping with that, ID document verification,Using a mobile device which reads the data using a NFC,Video footage with documents held by independent bodies. Is that what "you" meant ?

As previously said, this will be expensive and the idea that it is rolled out to the social media platforms with the monopoly of the market who are earning 100s of millions from people using their platforms, as they do have an ethical responsibility to those as many, many other giants of organisation do.

Just to help you out if no one else does, The main problem would be how you get these platforms on board with the laws once passed in the uk. They would loose a massive revenue stream if they were stopped from operating in the UK if they didn't agree, are they too big to care, maybe, probably not.
So it would about getting them on board and seeing how that played out.

My comment about feeling bullied may have been ever so slightly tongue in cheek. But that comment about my attitude was rude. However, I'm pretty tough and I can handle it.

It wasn't rude, it was an observation, which you have gone on to reinforce.

As previously said, this will be expensive and the idea that it is rolled out to the social media platforms with the monopoly of the market who are earning 100s of millions from people using their platforms, as they do have an ethical responsibility to those as many, many other giants of organisation do.

But what about small specialist groups? What about an individual who wants to create a group to discuss their black cats/ gerbil care/ cross stitch etc or a mum with twins wanting to create a chat group for other mums to allow them to pool ideas. How would those groups afford it? Or do you suggest that it can now only be multi million pound businesses that can run forums?

Ah, OK, so you're proposing to pass these laws in the UK only. Well - VPN, here we come! Laws circumvented.

Oh, and what forms of ID would you consider were valid? Remember, they have to be forms that everyone has easy access to, because otherwise the Internet becomes accessible only to the wealthy. Which wouldn't be ethical. What % of UK residents don't have passports? Driving licenses? Other forms of ID? And how do these percentages look among young people, who will both want and need to be online?

And how would you circumvent the issue of a burgeoning market in fake ID?

I left others to address the practicalities because I wanted to dig a little deeper and find out just how much of a 'we must all be nice to each other or else' authoritarian you are. Now I know, so I'll stick with the practicalities.

@StanfordPines

As previously said, this will be expensive and the idea that it is rolled out to the social media platforms with the monopoly of the market who are earning 100s of millions from people using their platforms, as they do have an ethical responsibility to those as many, many other giants of organisation do.

But what about small specialist groups? What about an individual who wants to create a group to discuss their black cats/ gerbil care/ cross stitch etc or a mum with twins wanting to create a chat group for other mums to allow them to pool ideas. How would those groups afford it? Or do you suggest that it can now only be multi million pound businesses that can run forums?

Tanzania implemented a law a couple of years ago that was under the guise of stopping hate/fake news etc but was really just to punish and find political activists and opponents that speak out on social media. Basically all online media creators bloggers, forums, youtubers etc had to pay to register and keep a list of their contributers for 12 months Had to pay roughly £600 to register and keep a list of all contributers to your website/blog etc. Loads of small niche online blogs and groups like the ones you suggested shut down, as could not afford the fee or the hassle. www.theverge.com/2018/7/6/17536686/tanzania-internet-laws-censorship-uganda-social-media-tax Really interesting article on it in more detail

Ah, OK, so you're proposing to pass these laws in the UK only. Well - VPN, here we come! Laws circumvented.

I'm "discussing" the proposal of this happening from the UK ,yes, where I live it could only really implement laws in it own country.

@Tigger001

Ah, OK, so you're proposing to pass these laws in the UK only. Well - VPN, here we come! Laws circumvented.

I'm "discussing" the proposal of this happening from the UK ,yes, where I live it could only really implement laws in it own country.

You do realise that only passing these laws in the UK will immediately render them ext week.utterly useless? So you've come up with something that will be hugely expensive, ridiculously authoritarian and repressive, and completely ineffectual. If I were you, I'd put it to Priti Patel. Given the government we have, it'll be policy n

Oh, and what forms of ID would you consider were valid? Remember, they have to be forms that everyone has easy access to, because otherwise the Internet becomes accessible only to the wealthy. Which wouldn't be ethical

No really as the Internet is already only accessible to people who can afford broadband and a device to use, so the Internet is not free now or available to all, it's a privilege.

What % of UK residents don't have passports? Driving licenses? Other forms of ID? And how do these percentages look among young people, who will both want and need to be online?

What age are you talking ?

And how would you circumvent the issue of a burgeoning market in fake ID?

I doubt it would be a massive problem, once the ID is decided upon, I doubt the majority of people would be dashing out to pay top whack for a fake ID to go on their preferred platform, it would be in the minority and as we have already established this about reducing the numbers not eliminating. The

I left others to address the practicalities because I wanted to dig a little deeper and find out just how much of a 'we must all be nice to each other or else' authoritarian you are.

Of course you did, playing the long game.
But you still don't know as you keep going back to this being about "being nice to each other".

Now I know so I'll stick with the practicalities

I really don't think you do.

No really as the Internet is already only accessible to people who can afford broadband and a device to use, so the Internet is not free now or available to all, it's a privilege.

Do you know how cheap second hand smartphones are? Ever heard of free WiFi? Do you know how cheap data packages can be if you have the right provider? The Internet is an essential - it should be free and available to all, but it is already possible to get access cheaply and easily.

I doubt the majority of people would be dashing out to pay top whack for a fake ID to go on their preferred platform

Prices would fall. More people would get really good at producing fake ID.

What age are you talking ?

13+, which is the age most social media platforms set for access. You haven't answered the question about what forms of ID you would consider valid.

You do realise that only passing these laws in the UK will immediately render them ext week.utterly useless? So you've come up with something that will be hugely expensive, ridiculously authoritarian and repressive, and completely ineffectual. If I were you, I'd put it to Priti Patel. Given the government we have, it'll be policy

You do realise I'm not offering to programme manage the delivery of this, it's a discussion.
It won't be useless, most people will not be bothered to go searching out fake IDs, that will pass, or need to be setting up VPNs.
Most people will moan, sign petitions, protest (maybe not ) and then go along with it because they don't want to miss out ?

It's not ridiculously authoritarian or repressive, no more so than information that is already known and held about you, open to hacking and a legal requirement to access a certain thing.

Not ineffective at all as previously discussed.

This government are appalling at protecting its people, I'm don't think this will be any different.

Do you know how easy it is to obtain and use a VPN? The majority of the teenagers at DD2's school use them when at school, because the school's firewall and antivirus are not very good. Many VPNs are free to use. If you think people won't use this technology, you're very naive indeed.

And the people most likely to pick up a quick free VPN are exactly the people you want to track - the bad ones, the ones who have something to hide, the bullies. So no, it won't work. Interesting discussion, but our efforts would be better focused at other ways of improving mental health. That means better services properly funded, sensible ways of dealing with bullying at the grassroots, and also teaching young people to deal with it when it does happen. If we fail on that last, we will be doing our teens an absolute disservice, because they will be completely ill-equipped for adult life.

Do you know how cheap second hand smartphones are? Ever heard of free WiFi? Do you know how cheap data packages can be if you have the right provider? The Internet is an essential - it should be free and available to all, but it is already possible to get access cheaply and easily.

But it's not, you do realise that. You do know schools were having to pay for wifi and send out laptops during the pandemic. You do realise people are living in poverty and a second hand smartphone is a shop for some families. It is an essential that not everyone had the privilege of having .

Prices would fall. More people would get really good at producing fake ID
I disagree that would happen at all. There would not be the demand for 1000s of counterfeiters so the price would still remain high for the good fakes, and people just wouldn't be bothered.
The counterfeiters wouldn't want a risk of getting caught by flooding a market with their product either, you know, when it becomes the next big thing.

13+, which is the age most social media platforms set for access. You haven't answered the question about what forms of ID you would consider valid.

Their parents would have to set them up and be responsible for their children until adult hood.

What does it matter what the ID is, it will hold all your information so you can be equally outraged by either.

I don't think fake id's would become cheaper/more popular. But vpns would, they're already becoming a lot more common for people to use to circumvent geolocked streaming content.

Interesting discussion, but our efforts would be better focused at other ways of improving mental health. That means better services properly funded, sensible ways of dealing with bullying at the grassroots, and also teaching young people to deal with it when it does happen. If we fail on that last, we will be doing our teens an absolute disservice, because they will be completely ill-equipped for adult life.

Which I have already said needs to happen with, properly trained staff to help those struggling with mental health, not being told to just get on with it, luckily most are. More funding from the government (not likely ) but much needed. Kids have been taught from the grassroots for years that bullying is wrong yet cases are rising, massively, especially online. So while it needs to continue its not enough, as it is not working !!!
You can't keep doing the exactly the same thing and expecting different outcomes, we need to be able to force this to into reduction, if other methods simply aren't working. This isn't about a bit of name calling it's about trolling, bullying and continued abuse. It is not acceptable.

I still don’t understand how showing some ID will stop someone trolling or bullying.

@StanfordPines

I still don’t understand how showing some ID will stop someone trolling or bullying.

It won’t. It is a ridiculous idea with no hope of being practically implemented.

Social media is mostly run by large US corporations. Their business model at least partly relies on people falling out and slagging each other online. There is zero chance of them agreeing to any daft ID rules.

How would people feel about asking for help and advice on a difficult/sensitive/personal issue on MN if their ID and contact details were being recorded?

@bobbiester

How would people feel about asking for help and advice on a difficult/sensitive/personal issue on MN if their ID and contact details were being recorded?

A very good point. Also: having ID requirements for young people supported and implemented by parents means young people in abusive households will be completely locked out from accessing help online. As indeed will abused spouses in controlling relationship. This idea will negatively affect those who need the Internet most. It's starry-eyed idealism.