Texas Adopts Online Child-Safety Bill Opposed by Apple's CEO (msn.com)
- Reference: 0177814921
- News link: https://apple.slashdot.org/story/25/05/27/1817225/texas-adopts-online-child-safety-bill-opposed-by-apples-ceo
- Source link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/technology/software/texas-adopts-online-child-safety-bill-opposed-by-apple-s-ceo/ar-AA1FAqf4
> The measure requires app stores to verify users' ages and secure parental approval before minors can download most apps or make in-app purchases. The bill drew fire from app store operators such as Google and Apple, which has argued that the legislation threatens the privacy of all users.
>
> The bill was a big enough priority for Apple that Cook called Abbott to emphasize the company's opposition to it, said a person familiar with their discussion, which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.
[1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/technology/software/texas-adopts-online-child-safety-bill-opposed-by-apple-s-ceo/ar-AA1FAqf4
Confusing (Score:3)
Why would you put appropriate age ranges on products you sell then be opposed to verifying that the people getting them are the appropriate age?
Re: Confusing (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me know how you verify that without severely intruding on everybody.
I'm waiting...
Re: (Score:2)
Let me know how you verify without face to face meetings. At all. What can you type into a web page, or upload to it, that a reasonably clever child (or friend of one) can't?
Re: (Score:2)
How about a photo of your driver's license, and a selfie that you take at that moment through the app?
Re: (Score:2)
No. My license has information they don't need to see. Plus bypass easily with photo of adult's license and photo of adult. There is no foolproof way to do this, and, ultimately, it will be faster and easier to cheat the system than it will be to go through the system.
Re: (Score:2)
Online brokerages and banks already require this information as a part of KYC rules/regs.
Re: (Score:2)
> How about a photo of your driver's license...?
That fails the, "without severe intrusion" test, and definitely runs afoul of the 1st Amendment. It's the kind of law that should have every signatory immediately impeached, removed from office, and never allowed to hold a political position in so much as the local PTA.
Re: (Score:2)
How about a photo of your parents' driver's license photoshopped with a self of your parent? Or an AI generated photo of a made up license/selfie?
Aside from the information on the license (which isn't short of everything needed for identity theft) now in the hands of a company that may or may not (but probably not) have half a clue how not to get hacked?
Re: (Score:2)
> Let me know how you verify that without severely intruding on everybody.
> I'm waiting...
Apple pushes really hard to get you to link a payment method to your account. Having a credit card in your name is generally considered good enough for government work when it comes to online adult verification.
Granted, I don't live in Texas and haven't read the text of the actual bill, so maybe it does require something a bit more tedious like photographing your driver's license. But as far as that being a privacy violation goes, wasn't Apple actually pushing for more states to adopt digital driver's lic
Re: (Score:2)
> but the second it's something a red state wants, now it's suddenly bad?
Lets be absolutely clear here. It's not a red vs blue issue for Apple/Google. It's just a matter of sales to them.
Re: (Score:2)
> It's just a matter of sales to them.
What are they going to sell less of? Phones? Apps that are free anyway?
The companies who stand to lose the most from age verification laws are the social media companies who want underaged folks on their services because it inflates the user count and an ad impression is an ad impression, but even they have come out in support of this method of age verification.
Apple and Google's opposition to this is absolutely baffling. Especially Google's, where normally they jump at the chance to Hoover up some more p
Re: (Score:2)
> What are they going to sell less of? Phones? Apps that are free anyway?
Apps that aren't free, and in-app purchases. The summary even specifically mentioned IAP.
> Apple and Google's opposition to this is absolutely baffling.
No, like I said, it's about sales.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not doing IAP without a payment method on file, and that's very likely all that'd be needed for age verification anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
> Apple and Google's opposition to this is absolutely baffling.
They are most likely afraid of being held responsible for what happens when some child gets sexually assaulted by a predator they met online after using some trick to bypass the age-restrictions on downloading an app. Lawsuits, tearful parents on the news, criminal liability, congressional subpoenas, etc. -the same reason the apps don't want the responsibility.
Re: (Score:2)
> Having a credit card in your name is generally considered good enough for government work when it comes to online adult verification.
This is no longer true. As we have moved away from cash in our society, children are commonly issued bank accounts and debit cards, and even real credit cards. It is surprisingly common. I have seen advertisements for credit cards for children with varying degrees of parental control / notification / monitoring built in; allowing parents to get texts of purchases, or restrict purchases by amount, or to white-listed groups of entities.
Re: (Score:2)
Credit cards have files associated with them. The payment provider generally knows the age of the cardholder.
Re: (Score:2)
Do it the "old fashioned" way: require either a credit card or bank/checking account on file. Your banks and cc companies know who you are, and it's sufficient cya to impose such measures.
Re: (Score:2)
The companies object because they know their customers will. (Their customers are, by and large, advertisers, not users, but the advertisers know their targets will object.)
Users object because they believe that doing so will give up their personal information to big companies. Because they're too ignorant and, frankly, stupid to understand that those companies already have it all anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Just like how we have ratings on TV shows and movies.. its up to the consumer to set policies and restrictions... the ratings are there more for guidence.. and the issue isn't ratings.. the issue is the same issue as it is with "porn" validating ages.. how do you it in a way that doesn't harm the company by collecting unreasonable information.. and if say someone steals a CC/ID to submit.. the company is often going to be held to blame.. thus making doing any business even that much more difficult/costly..
Re: (Score:2)
> And since apple doesn't allow for "adult" content on their platforms (as far as apps go).. there really isn't a need for this other than government intrusion/overeach...
Apple doesn't allow apps where the primary focus is explicit adult content. They do, however, allow apps that can be used to access adult content. For example, Reddit's app is allowed and there is no shortage of porn on Reddit.
Also, some states restrict social media to a certain age, similar to how there's a PG-13 rating on movies. And before someone says it, yes, I know that the PG-13 rating is a guideline and not a legal age restriction, so it's not exactly the same thing as the social media age requir
This is of Apple & Google's own making (Score:4, Insightful)
They both wanted total control ("gate keepers") over their respective platforms, including how users acquire apps & use/make purchases on their devices. It's only natural that governments would required the "gate keepers" to help them watch over those "gates" with whatever requirements the government wants.
Cook can bitch all he wants, but this is of Apple's (and Google's) own making.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean if you know and you support them out of craven self-interest then yeah, kinda. At the very least they contributed and at the very least they should feel bad and at some point admit as such (that's probably me asking too much).
Let's state the obvious. (Score:2)
Privacy is not their real concern, of course. They're simply worried that with hoops and loops to jump through, their dark patterns to make users hooked in won't work as easily as before, and they'll lose money. It's always about the money.
Re: (Score:2)
Ding Ding Ding!
The correct answer.
/thread
Re: (Score:2)
> Privacy is not their real concern, of course. They're simply worried that with hoops and loops to jump through, their dark patterns to make users hooked in won't work as easily as before, and they'll lose money. It's always about the money.
Yes, Apple had no problem putting onerous auditing requirements on developers when they got forced to open up iOS to outside purchases in some countries (for only 3% less than the typically 30% extortion they demand to boot!), but now that Apple is required to do work to implement this, you hear Cook whine like the little bitch that he is.
Is Tim Apple losing his mind? (Score:2)
The alternative to this was age checks at the individual app level, which would amount to less user privacy. I thought part of Apple's whole privacy schtick is that you can trust Apple to safeguard your information when it comes to login info and payment information, so what's the big deal of also adding your birthdate into the mix? Ignoring the fact that I'm pretty sure Apple still doesn't have porn apps, I'd much rather have Apple tell Wankurvidcams.com that I'm an adult, versus having to complete the p
Re: (Score:1)
The alternative to this was age checks at the individual app level
No, the alternative is not doing it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
> No, the alternative is not doing it at all.
Problem is that the government has a $5 wrench and they're not afraid to start swinging it around.
Personally, I don't think parents should be handing kids unrestricted smartphones in the first place, but that ship has clearly sailed. The nanny state wouldn't be getting involved if parents actually set up parental controls like they should've.
Re: (Score:2)
> I don't think parents should be handing kids unrestricted smartphones in the first place...
This goes much deeper than anything so trivial, and is a symptom of systemic societal failures. In no particular order (and not exhaustive):
1) Single parent households.
2) Two parent households where both parents work (thanks for nothing, Feminism).
3) Divorce.
4) Failure to heal childhood emotional wounds before having children.
5) Failure to treat children like intelligent human beings.
6) Religion.
7) Public school.
Skip the age verification (Score:3)
All app stores should REQUIRE the device making the request for the update or app download to provide its location. If it is in the State of Texas, DENY the download, requiring the owner to go to another state to get the app download. Things will change for Abbott real quick.
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that if you have iPhone, you can do one of two things: 1) share your apple ID in which case your kids would only get the same apps as you download, or 2) add your kids to a "family" where they have to request any app they want and you, as the parent, must approve that app request.
So.. there are already tools for a **PARENT** to manage this. The state does not need to get involved and try to micromanage parenting.
Sounds like either you don't have kids or have no idea how to manage kids phones.
Re: (Score:2)
> Lets just let kids download apps where child predators can get at them 24/7. Why the hell not - right?
Not sure how it is on Android, but Apple has very granular parental controls where you absolutely can set it so a kid is only allowed to access parentally pre-approved apps. Of course, if parents did actually bother to use the feature, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
For the children (Score:3)
This totally won't be used against people who call politicians names on social media.
Re: (Score:2)
> This totally won't be used against people who call politicians names on social media.
Actually, the whole point of doing it at the app store level is specifically to avoid social media companies having to run age checks. Most of the major social media companies are in favor of letting Apple and Google handle it. Really, this is the less evil outcome in a political era where Republicans are running roughshod over everything.
POS Governor (Score:1)
Abbott isn't even half a man. He wants Texas to be a nanny state so instead of putting decisions like this and THC up to the voters through ballot initiatives, he just makes the decision for us. Even if 100% of conservative Texans disagree with Abbott on these subjects, they'll still vote for him over a Democrat. This means shit heads like Abbott can pretty much do whatever they want so long as the gerrymandering keeps Texas red.
Re: (Score:2)
Even the Democrats have mostly jumped on board the age verification bandwagon. They're fully invested in the narrative that social media is harmful to young developing minds. Plus, if you so much as oppose anything ostensibly "for the children", you're immediately labeled a "groomer". Anyone who could see which way the political winds were blowing, knew that online age verification laws were an eventual inevitability.
Re: (Score:2)
Ballot initiatives, what ballot initiatives?
Texas doesn't have initiative and referendum. The legislature can do what it likes so long as they don't piss off the voters enough to to get voted out. Voters have short memories so this rarely happens, and this is one of the reasons we see legislators making a career out of being elected to office.
There are quite a few states with no initiative and referendum mechanisms.
Just cut off Texas (Score:1)
I am willing to bet if they take a short term hit and block Texas due to that bill, there will be enough backlash they will back peddle. There is a good chance the people would not put up with that BS (except that theyâ(TM)re Texans and keep voting these same morons in over and over, so who knows).
Not hard to understand (Score:2)
Laws existed to protect children from harmful things long before the internet existed. You don't get to bypass those laws just because the bad things are online. And you also don't get to bypass those laws because "muh privacy." Sorry, not sorry. If you don't like that then don't use the service. The laws should have been expanded to require age verification decades ago.
Re: (Score:1)
Parents can already manage their kids apps on iPhone. Pretty sure they can also do that in Android.
To use your analogy of "pre-Internet"... There was no law requiring you submit your ID to some database (to probably get hacked) to sign up for HBO, Cinemax, or Showtime. Adults would be responsible for whether or not their kids watched programs on those channels. Same thing here. Parents can, and should, be responsible for what apps their kids get. There is no need to scan, upload, take a picture, etc. to acc
Re: Not hard to understand (Score:2)
"There was no law requiring you submit your ID to some database (to probably get hacked) to sign up for HBO, Cinemax, or Showtime." You had to be an adult to have the prerequisite cable or satellite service. Those companies didn't sign up minors for those services. And the worst that could happen with HBO, Cinemax etc is that a kid might hear some swear words or see some boobs. There's much worse you can get into on the net these days.
Implications for Open Source software (Score:2)
Here's the text of the bill, [1]https://legiscan.com/TX/text/S... [legiscan.com]. The issue I see here is it very broadly defines "app store" to include any online distribution mechanism, which would include github or any website with downloadable code, and "mobile device" pretty much includes anything not chained to the floor. I'm not so keen on providing my personal information to prove my age just to download a piece of open source software. This isn't just a slippery slope, it's 360 degree hot metal slide (Texans know wh
[1] https://legiscan.com/TX/text/SB2420/id/3204209
Mirror of Australia's law (Score:1)
This would appear to be similar to Australia's law
quote "The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 introduces a mandatory minimum age of 16 for accounts on certain social media platforms"
and
"The onus is on the applicable service providers to introduce systems and processes that ensure people under the minimum age cannot create or keep a social media account. "
and
"The age restriction requirements will take effect by December 2025. "
The law does not specify what method the social media c
Next up.... (Score:2)
Texas bans VPNs as people realize they can use them to get around any vendor geoblocking.
A Win for Texas (Score:2, Insightful)
So the Win for Texas here is that they need to hand over more authentic personal information to big companies, and have a nanny state?
Re: (Score:2)
Just like how the NRA totally isn't a national registry of gun owners.
Re: (Score:2)
> I'm a lifetime member and don't own a gun.
I own a gun and I'm not a member, so there's the law of averages for ya.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this actually a ploy for Texas to make Apple collect all the data so their politicians can later subpoena that info for their own nonsense?
I do wonder how loose the requirements will be for proving "parentage" and "approval".
Will a credit card suffice? If you login to your kid's iPhone (or your little brother's) and enter your credit card info and give them the PIN, does that count as tacit approval? Or will Apple have to call the parents for voice approval on every purchase?