lol646 jili 777 login

None

It is an ambitious social experiment of our moment in history — one that experts say could accomplish something that parents, schools and other governments have attempted with varying degrees of success: keeping kids off social media until they turn 16. Australia’s new law, approved by its Parliament last week, is an attempt to swim against many tides of modern life — formidable forces like technology, marketing, globalization and, of course, the iron will of a teenager. The ban won’t go into effect for another year. But how will Australia be able to enforce it? That’s not clear, nor will it be easy. TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram have become so ingrained in young people’s lives that going cold turkey will be difficult. Platforms will be held liable The law will make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent children younger than 16 from holding accounts. Leaders and parents in countries around the world are watching Australia’s policy closely as many seek to protect young kids from the internet’s dangerous corners — and, not incidentally, from each other. Most nations have taken different routes, from parental consent requirements to minimum age limits. Many child safety experts, parents and even teens who have waited to get on social media consider Australia’s move a positive step. “What’s most important for kids, just like adults, is real human connection. Less time alone on the screen means more time to connect, not less,” said Julie Scelfo, the founder of Mothers Against Media Addiction, or MAMA, a grassroots group of parents aimed at combatting the harms of social media to children. “I’m confident we can support our kids in interacting in any number of ways aside from sharing the latest meme.” The harms to children from social media have been well documented in the two decades since Facebook’s launch ushered in a new era in how the world communicates. Kids who spend more time on social media, especially as tweens or young teenagers, are more likely to experience depression and anxiety, according to multiple studies — though it is not yet clear if there is a causal relationship. What’s more, many are exposed to content that is not appropriate for their age, including pornography and violence, as well as social pressures about body image and makeup. They also face bullying, sexual harassment and unwanted advances from their peers as well as adult strangers. Because their brains are not fully developed, teenagers, especially younger ones the law is focused on, are also more affected by social comparisons than adults, so even happy posts from friends can send them into a negative spiral. What unintended harms could be caused? Paul Taske, associate director of litigation at the tech lobbying group NetChoice, says he considers the ban “one of the most extreme violations of free speech on the world stage today” even as he expressed relief that the First Amendment prevents such law in the United States “These restrictions would create a massive cultural shift,” Taske said. David Inserra, a fellow for Free Expression and Technology, Cato Institute, called the bill “about as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike” in a recent blog post. He said no verification system can ensure accuracy while also protecting privacy and not impacting adults in the process. Privacy advocates have also raised concerns about the law’s effect on online anonymity, a cornerstone of online communications — and something that can protect teens on social platforms. “Whether it be religious minorities and dissidents, LGBTQ youth, those in abusive situations, whistleblowers, or countless other speakers in tricky situations, anonymous speech is a critical tool to safely challenge authority and express controversial opinions,” Inserra said. Other countries are trying to figure it out, too In the United States, some parents are keeping kids off social media either informally or as part of an organized campaign such as Wait Until 8th, a group that helps parents delay kids’ access to social media and phones. This fall, Norway announced plans to ban kids under 15 from using social media, while France is testing a smartphone ban for kids under 15 in a limited number of schools — a policy that could be rolled out nationwide if successful. U.S. lawmakers have held multiple congressional hearings — most recently in January — on child online safety. Still, the last federal law aimed at protecting children online was enacted in 1998, six years before Facebook’s founding. In July, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly passed legislation designed to protect children from dangerous online content, pushing forward with what would be the first major effort by Congress in decades to hold tech companies more accountable. But the Kids Online Safety Act has since stalled in the House. While several states have passed laws requiring age verification, those are stuck in court. Utah became the first state to pass laws regulating children’s social media use in 2023. In September, a judge issued the preliminary injunction against the law, which would have required social media companies to verify the ages of users, apply privacy settings and limit some features. NetChoice has also obtained injunctions temporarily halting similar laws in several other states. And last May, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy said there is insufficient evidence to show social media is safe for kids. He urged policymakers to treat social media like car seats, baby formula, medication and other products children use.

Seahawks' defense dominates in low-scoring win over Bears

Is it safe to eat turkey this Thanksgiving amid bird flu outbreak? Here’s what experts sayWall Street stocks stumbled on Friday as major companies saw their shares fall towards the end of a holiday week. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 0.8 percent to 42,992, while the broad-based S&P 500 slid 1.1 percent to 5,970. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite Index plunged 1.5 percent to 19,722. Steve Sosnick of Interactive Brokers said the sell-off caught many people by surprise. "I think a lot of people got very complacent about the idea that we would have a Santa Claus rally," he added. He was referring to a tendency for markets to fare well in the last five trading days of the year, and the first two in the new year. "The selling is very much across-the-board. There's not an obvious catalyst for it today," said Sosnick, noting that the trend was more ferocious as volumes were light. Major companies in particular saw their shares fall, with Microsoft slipping 1.7 percent. Amazon lost 1.4 percent, while Nvidia dropped 2.0 percent. Peter Cardillo of Spartan Capital said the slump was both a "year-end adjustment" and due to a rise in US Treasury bond yields. "That's putting the brakes on, applying the brakes to the market," he said. (AFP)