Hopefully by highlighting the problem and bringing it out into the open a rushed job won't happen.
Unless they use urgency it may well be that they introduce the Bill including an undefined age verification system and campaign on it.
Restricting under 16's on social media is a vote winner.
Subjecting EVERYONE who uses social media (nearly everyone) to an age verification system would, in my view, be a poison chalice and would dilute the enthusiam for the restrictions.
Looks like they're coming at us/for us from all directions David.
Are you aware of this one?
"The Government is progressing the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to reform the road user charge (RUC) system. Regulations are required by the Bill, if enacted, to support the modernisation of the road user charges (RUC) system.
This legislative reform is a key step in the goal to transition all vehicles from fuel excise duty to road user charges, while ensuring all road users contribute fairly based on how they use the network.
Electronic distance recorders – retaining relatively stringent requirements for heavy vehicles while adopting a more flexible outcomes-focused approach for light vehicles to support emerging technologies."
It looks like, if you join the dots "ensuring all road users contribute fairly based on how they use the network" will probably lead to tracking where everyone drives (via a mandatory App or something), to somehow ensure we contribute fairly to the type of road we use (highways may be charged more than rural roads; on holiday Vs driving to work; etc etc).....
David - I really enjoy your writing but I think one of the ways you're framing the issue is wrong. Parents aren't just finding it diffulty to fulfil their parenting role by saying no. Their ability to do so is actively undermined by current state policies. My seven year old needs to take a laptop to class. Why? Who knows, the research is against it in terms of learning outcomes. We are currently trying to push back against this, but it's common at a number of schools and normalises device use from a young age.
I think one of the thing's I find most annoying about the broader debate (and I'm not saying that you've indulged in this) is acting as if it's a moral panic issue. Millenial parents are intimately aware of the harm that can result from social media use because they grew up with it. This isn't a case of parents not properly understanding what dungeons and dragons and imagining up dangers.
Thanks for your comment which adds nuance to the issue. I am surprised at the use of devices as learning aids. My grandsons do all their school work on iPads. But they have a tough mother who does say no to overuse of devices in downtime.
As far as the moral panic is concerned have a chat to the B416 people - Cecilia Robinson, Anna Mowbray and others. That seems to be where the panic is coming from.
But what they haven't thought about is the age verfication system that is going to be deployed - the unasked question.
Thank you for raising this vital question/matter. I feel very strongly about this and have been closely watching the Australian debacle. Are our "honorable' politicians and "worried mummys" so dense that they cannot conceive that youngsters will use many workarounds? The answer must be a resounding yes, they are indeed certifiably stupid!
In some ways it's merely academic to me. I use VPNs and a number of alternative email addresses and IDs. I also stay well away from the toxic cesspits of (un)social media such as Facedik, Dickdok and Twitzone.
Much more seriously, data used for one purpose can easily be repurposed for evil.
An excellent, but extreme, example is the comprehensive Municipal Jewish databases developed in Holland in the 1920's. Guess what the Nazis were delighted to obtain when they invaded?
digital.kenyon.edu has a good summary of this appalling misuse of data, which directly led to Holland having the highest rate of Jewish murders in Western Europe over 1940-45
Regrettably, the public servant (and Nazi collaborator) Jacobus Lentz, who masterminded this. never met the hangman.
It blows me away, to think the Govt may try to rush something thru ahead of the next election, without any mandate.
After all these years, I'm starting to think that perhaps democracy only applies to major issues when it suits the Pollies.
I lost a lot of faith/confidence over Labour's hidden/secret He Puapua agenda, making them the most devious party in NZ's history, IMO
Hopefully by highlighting the problem and bringing it out into the open a rushed job won't happen.
Unless they use urgency it may well be that they introduce the Bill including an undefined age verification system and campaign on it.
Restricting under 16's on social media is a vote winner.
Subjecting EVERYONE who uses social media (nearly everyone) to an age verification system would, in my view, be a poison chalice and would dilute the enthusiam for the restrictions.
Looks like they're coming at us/for us from all directions David.
Are you aware of this one?
"The Government is progressing the Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill to reform the road user charge (RUC) system. Regulations are required by the Bill, if enacted, to support the modernisation of the road user charges (RUC) system.
This legislative reform is a key step in the goal to transition all vehicles from fuel excise duty to road user charges, while ensuring all road users contribute fairly based on how they use the network.
Electronic distance recorders – retaining relatively stringent requirements for heavy vehicles while adopting a more flexible outcomes-focused approach for light vehicles to support emerging technologies."
It looks like, if you join the dots "ensuring all road users contribute fairly based on how they use the network" will probably lead to tracking where everyone drives (via a mandatory App or something), to somehow ensure we contribute fairly to the type of road we use (highways may be charged more than rural roads; on holiday Vs driving to work; etc etc).....
Big Brother, armed with AI, is watching. Intently.
David - I really enjoy your writing but I think one of the ways you're framing the issue is wrong. Parents aren't just finding it diffulty to fulfil their parenting role by saying no. Their ability to do so is actively undermined by current state policies. My seven year old needs to take a laptop to class. Why? Who knows, the research is against it in terms of learning outcomes. We are currently trying to push back against this, but it's common at a number of schools and normalises device use from a young age.
I think one of the thing's I find most annoying about the broader debate (and I'm not saying that you've indulged in this) is acting as if it's a moral panic issue. Millenial parents are intimately aware of the harm that can result from social media use because they grew up with it. This isn't a case of parents not properly understanding what dungeons and dragons and imagining up dangers.
Laurie
Thanks for your comment which adds nuance to the issue. I am surprised at the use of devices as learning aids. My grandsons do all their school work on iPads. But they have a tough mother who does say no to overuse of devices in downtime.
As far as the moral panic is concerned have a chat to the B416 people - Cecilia Robinson, Anna Mowbray and others. That seems to be where the panic is coming from.
But what they haven't thought about is the age verfication system that is going to be deployed - the unasked question.
Thank you for raising this vital question/matter. I feel very strongly about this and have been closely watching the Australian debacle. Are our "honorable' politicians and "worried mummys" so dense that they cannot conceive that youngsters will use many workarounds? The answer must be a resounding yes, they are indeed certifiably stupid!
In some ways it's merely academic to me. I use VPNs and a number of alternative email addresses and IDs. I also stay well away from the toxic cesspits of (un)social media such as Facedik, Dickdok and Twitzone.
Much more seriously, data used for one purpose can easily be repurposed for evil.
An excellent, but extreme, example is the comprehensive Municipal Jewish databases developed in Holland in the 1920's. Guess what the Nazis were delighted to obtain when they invaded?
digital.kenyon.edu has a good summary of this appalling misuse of data, which directly led to Holland having the highest rate of Jewish murders in Western Europe over 1940-45
Regrettably, the public servant (and Nazi collaborator) Jacobus Lentz, who masterminded this. never met the hangman.
Thanks for shining the light on this matter. As with many of your posts this needs to be read far and wide.