- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
Companies approached by the eSafety commissioner this month about the requirement to prevent under 16s from holding social media accounts from 10 December have conducted a self-assessment that the commissioner will use to decide if they need to comply with the ban.
eSafety will not be formally declaring which service meets the criteria but companies that eSafety believes meet the criteria will be expected to comply.
This is the right way to make laws and rules.
It’s the same way we do tax - self compliance. You self report but if you’re caught breaking the rules then you face punishments.
If the administration just made a list of who’s effected, it would be perpetually incomplete. This way, everyone is effected.
They can’t just unilaterally decide that your self assessment is “wrong” without explanation. Also their decisions about who is effected are public, and can be relied on by others to self assess.
This leads to overzealous blocking because it might be by some interpretation applicable to you/your product.
Thus you will be blocking in advance just so you don’t face charges.
Great.
No it doesn’t. Our tax system works the same way. It doesn’t lead to overzealous deduction denial because people are worried about getting it wrong.
Its an efficient and transparent approach.
“Just make the rules super vague and subject to a single person mood on the day and if you break them you’re all sorts of fucked”…… you’re not serious are you?
Absolutely nothing about these authoritarian rules are “public”. It’s just more power being handed to the eKaren to use for her political and ideological reasons, with exactly zero accountability, oversight, or way for us to have a say.