Tag: think of the children

California Law Forces Age-Tracking Into Every Operating System by 2027

California wants to build a surveillance layer into every device its residents touch. Assembly Bill 1043, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom and taking effect January 1, 2027, requires every operating system provider to collect age information from users at account setup and broadcast that data to app developers through a real-time API.

Windows, macOS, Android, iOS, Linux distributions, Valve’s SteamOS: if it runs an operating system, it’s covered by this overreaching law.

The proposals are particularly dumb for open-source Linux operating systems. Linux exists specifically because some people want computing that doesn’t surveil them. That’s not incidental to why the platform exists; it’s foundational.

Distributions like Arch, Debian, and Gentoo have no centralized account infrastructure by design. Users download ISOs from mirrors, modify source code freely, and run systems that report to nobody.

Keep reading

Xbox UK Age Verification Launch Locks Out Thousands of Players

Xbox’s mandatory age verification rollout in the UK was a disaster almost immediately, locking thousands of players out of games, voice chat, and apps like Discord with no clear path back in.

The failures started overnight. Players report being ejected mid-session to complete age verification checks that then took hours, stalled indefinitely, or simply refused to work regardless of what identification they submitted.

Government ID, mobile numbers, and live video age estimation; the system rejected them all for many users. Others made it through verification only to find their accounts still restricted with no explanation and no recourse beyond contacting Xbox support.

Microsoft’s support page now carries a notice confirming it is “aware of the issue and working to fix it.” That’s the extent of the official guidance.

The verification requirement exists to comply with the UK’s new censorship law, the Online Safety Act, legislation mandating that platforms facilitating online communication verify user ages. The actual system XBox built to deliver that compliance forcibly disconnected players from games in progress, stripped away chat functionality with anyone outside their friends list, and blocked access to third-party services.

Users who have held Xbox accounts for over 18 years found themselves flagged for verification anyway. The system doesn’t consider account age, history, or any contextual signal that might indicate an adult user. Everyone gets treated as potentially underage until they hand over documentation.

“The amount of times I’ve tried to do any method of the verification tonight is stupid,” wrote one user. “Can’t change privacy settings on my Xbox to allow me to see mods on games too. Can’t chat on Discord. Utterly broken.”

“Been trying to verify my ID for the past few hours,” added another. “It finally worked but I can’t access anything still. No Discord access at all.”

Keep reading

LA County Sues Roblox Over False Child Safety Claims and Lack of Age Verification

Los Angeles County filed a lawsuit against Roblox, alleging the platform has built a system that leaves children exposed to grooming because it does not go far enough in checking user IDs to prove their age.

The suit names the company for public nuisance and violations of California’s false advertising law.

We obtained a copy of the complaint for you here.

The complaint is direct: “Roblox portrays its platform as a safe and appropriate place for children to play. In reality, and as Roblox well knows, the design of its platform makes children easy prey for pedophiles.”

If you weren’t aware of how big Roblox is and why this is important, Roblox serves roughly 144 million daily active users. That’s more than both Fortnite and the entire userbase of the Steam platform combined.

The platform also lets people create and play games, chat through customizable avatars, and spend real money on virtual currency.

LA County’s suit argues Roblox has consistently failed to moderate user-generated content, enforce its own age restrictions, or honestly disclose the risks predators pose to children using the service.

There is no doubt the platform’s moderation gaps have attracted scrutiny for years, and that the platform has had issues with grooming of minors, but the LA lawsuit is the latest in a pattern of governments and researchers documenting the same problem Roblox has repeatedly said it’s addressing, and the latest attempt to mandate digital ID checks.

Roblox rejected the suit’s allegations. A company spokesman said the platform was built “with safety at its core” and pointed to existing protections: “We have advanced safeguards that monitor our platform for harmful content and communications, and users cannot send or receive images via chat, avoiding one of the most prevalent opportunities for misuse seen elsewhere online.”

The company added that it takes action against rule violators and cooperates with law enforcement, closing with: “There is no finish line when it comes to protecting kids and, while no system can be perfect, our commitment to safety never ends.”

The false advertising angle is what is most important to note. LA isn’t suing Roblox over what it collects or who can see it. The county is suing because the company told parents the platform was safe for kids while allegedly knowing otherwise.

Keep reading

Zuckerberg’s “Fix” for Child Safety Could End Anonymous Internet Access for Everyone

Mark Zuckerberg spent more than five hours on the stand in Los Angeles Superior Court on Wednesday, testifying before a jury for the first time about claims that Meta deliberately designed Instagram to addict children.

The headline from most coverage was the spectacle: an annotated paper trail of internal emails, a 35-foot collage of the plaintiff’s Instagram posts unspooled across the courtroom, a CEO growing visibly agitated under cross-examination.

The more important story is what Wednesday’s proceedings are being used to build.

The trial is framed as a child safety case. What it is actually doing, especially through Zuckerberg’s own testimony, is laying the political and legal groundwork for mandatory identity verification across the internet.

And Zuckerberg, rather than pushing back on that outcome, offered the court his preferred implementation plan.

Keep reading

French lawmakers vote to ban social media use by under-15s

French lawmakers have passed a bill that would ban social media use by under-15s, a move championed by president Emmanuel Macron as a way to protect children from excessive screen time.

The lower national assembly adopted the text by a vote of 130 to 21 in a lengthy overnight session from Monday to Tuesday.

It will now go to the Senate, France’s upper house, ahead of becoming law.

Macron hailed the vote as a “major step” to protect French children and teenagers in a post on X.

The legislation, which also provides for a ban on mobile phones in high schools, would make France the second country to take such a step following Australia’s ban for under-16s in December.

As social media has grown, so has concern that too much screen time is harming child development and contributing to mental health problems.

Keep reading

Macron Calls Online Free Speech Argument “Pure Bullshit”

European governments framing social media bans for minors as child protection are quiet about what those bans actually require: identity checks for everyone. Every adult who wants to use Instagram, TikTok, or YouTube in France, Spain, or Germany would need to verify their real-world identity to access the platform. Anonymity, one of the oldest protections for dissenting speech, goes with it.

That’s the context Emmanuel Macron left out when he called free speech online “pure bullshit” in New Delhi on Wednesday.

The French president was addressing companies and their American backers as European governments push social media restrictions, as well as curbs on “hate speech,” a move the Trump administration has criticized as censorship.

Macron’s counterargument is based on algorithmic opacity. “Having no clue about how their algorithm is made, how it’s tested, trained, and where it will guide you, the democratic consequences of this bias could be huge,” he said.

Keep reading

40 State Attorneys General Want To Tie Online Access to ID

A bloc of 40 state and territorial attorneys general is urging Congress to adopt the Senate’s version of the controversial Kids Online Safety Act, positioning it as the stronger regulatory instrument and rejecting the House companion as insufficient.

The Act would kill online anonymity and tie online activity and speech to a real-world identity.

Acting through the National Association of Attorneys General, the coalition sent a letter to congressional leadership endorsing S. 1748 and opposing H.R. 6484.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

Their request centers on structural differences between the bills. The Senate proposal would create a federally enforceable “Duty of Care” requiring covered platforms to mitigate defined harms to minors.

Enforcement authority would rest with the Federal Trade Commission, which could investigate and sue companies that fail to prevent minors from encountering content deemed to cause “harm to minors.”

That framework would require regulators to evaluate internal content moderation systems, recommendation algorithms, and safety controls.

S. 1748 also directs the Secretary of Commerce, the FTC, and the Federal Communications Commission to study “the most technologically feasible methods and options for developing systems to verify age at the device or operating system level.”

This language moves beyond platform-level age gates and toward infrastructure embedded directly into hardware or operating systems.

Age verification at that layer would not function without some form of credentialing. Device-level verification would likely depend on digital identity checks tied to government-issued identification, third-party age verification vendors, or persistent account authentication systems.

That means users could be required to submit identifying information before accessing broad categories of lawful online speech. Anonymous browsing depends on the ability to access content without linking identity credentials to activity.

Keep reading

“Kids Off Social Media Act” Opens the Door to Digital ID by Default

Congress is once again stepping into the role of digital caretaker, this time through the Kids Off Social Media Act, with a proposal from Rep. Anna Paulina Luna that seeks to impose federal rules on how young people interact with the world.

The house companion bill (to go along with the senate bill) attempts to set national limits on who can hold social media accounts, how platforms may structure their systems, and what kinds of data they are allowed to use when dealing with children and teenagers.

Framed as a response to growing parental concern, the legislation reflects a broader push to regulate online spaces through age-based access and design mandates rather than direct content rules.

The proposal promises restraint while quietly expanding Washington’s reach into the architecture of online speech. Backers of the bill will insist it targets corporate behavior rather than expression itself. The bill’s mechanics tell a more complicated story.

The bill is the result of a brief but telling legislative evolution. Early versions circulated in 2024 were framed as extensions of existing child privacy rules rather than participation bans. Those drafts focused on limiting data collection, restricting targeted advertising to minors, and discouraging algorithmic amplification, while avoiding hard access restrictions or explicit age enforcement mandates.

That posture shifted as the bill gained bipartisan backing. By late 2024, lawmakers increasingly treated social media as an inherently unsafe environment for children rather than a service in need of reform. When the bill was reintroduced in January 2025, it reflected that change. The new version imposed a categorical ban on accounts for users under 13, restricted recommendation systems for users under 17, and strengthened enforcement through the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general, with Senate sponsorship led by Ted Cruz and Brian Schatz.

Keep reading

EU Law Could Extend Scanning of Private Messages Until 2027

The European Parliament is considering another extension of Chat Control 1.0, the “temporary” exemption that allows communications providers to scan private messages (under the premise of preventing child abuse) despite the protections of the EU’s ePrivacy Directive.

A draft report presented by rapporteur Birgit Sippel (S&D) would prolong the derogation until April 3, 2027.

At first glance, the proposal appears to roll back some of the most controversial elements of Chat Control. Text message scanning and automated analysis of previously unknown images would be explicitly excluded. Supporters have framed this as a narrowing of scope.

However, the core mechanism of Chat Control remains untouched.

The draft continues to permit mass hash scanning of private communications for so-called “known” material.

According to former MEP and digital rights activist Patrick Breyer, approximately 99 percent of all reports generated under Chat Control 1.0 originate from hash-based detection.

Almost all of those reports come from a single company, Meta, which already limits its scanning to known material only. Under the new proposal, Meta’s practices would remain fully authorized.

As a result, the draft would not meaningfully reduce the volume, scope, or nature of surveillance. The machinery keeps running, with a few of its most visibly controversial attachments removed.

Hash scanning is often portrayed as precise and reliable. The evidence points in the opposite direction.

First, the technology is incapable of understanding context or intent. Hash databases are largely built using US legal definitions of illegality, which do not map cleanly onto the criminal law of EU Member States.

The German Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) reports that close to half of all chat control reports are criminally irrelevant.

Each false positive still requires assessment, documentation, and follow-up. Investigators are forced to triage noise rather than pursue complex cases involving production, coercion, and organized abuse.

The strategic weakness is compounded by a simple reality. Offenders adapt. As more services adopt end-to-end encryption, abusers migrate accordingly. Since 2022, the number of chat-based reports sent to police has fallen by roughly 50 percent, not because abuse has declined, but because scanning has become easier to evade.

“Both children and adults deserve a paradigm shift in online child protection, not token measures,” Breyer said in a statement to Reclaim The Net.

“Whether looking for ‘known’ or ‘unknown’ content, the principle remains: the post office cannot simply open and scan every letter at random. Searching only for known images fails to stop ongoing abuse or rescue victims.”

Keep reading

Alabama Lawmakers Pass Bill To Increase Penalties For Smoking Marijuana In A Car Where A Child Is Present

The Alabama House of Representatives Thursday passed a bill that prohibits smoking or vaping marijuana in a car with children.

HB 72, sponsored by Rep. Patrick Sellers, D-Pleasant Grove, would make it a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail,  for those who smoke marijuana in a car with a child under 19.

The bill passed 77-2 after an unusual debate largely limited to the 29 Democrats in the 105-member chamber over potential unintended consequences. Most Democrats abstained from the vote. Four voted in favor; Reps. Mary Moore, D-Birmingham and TaShina Morris, D-Montgomery, voted against the bill.

“It’s about protecting the children, protecting every single child in the state of Alabama,” Sellers said after the meeting. “And that’s the motivation behind making sure that every child has the 100 percent ability to learn in the best environment that they can and keep them safe.”

Under the bill, individuals who are found to have smoked marijuana in the car with a child would be required to go through an educational program conducted by the Department of Public Health and would be reported by law enforcement to local county human resources departments.

Several Democrats who spoke on the measure cited the toll that harsh drug laws had taken on minority communities.

“It goes back to the heart of criminalization of marijuana in certain communities,” Rep. Juandalynn Givan, D-Birmingham, said after the meeting. “And those are communities that are communities typical of people of color.”

Givan also said House Democrats had wanted to work with Sellers on the bill.

“The Democratic Party, on several attempts, said that this is a bill that we might need to sit down and curate,” she said. “I’m not sure why the sponsor of the bill did not do that.”

Morris raised concerns about the bill’s definition of a child during debate.

“So we’re making a parent responsible for an 18-year-old who has a marijuana smell on them,” she said. “We know at the ages of 16 and 17, especially with the influence of walking outside and going different places, that they are smoking, maybe without the parent even knowing.”

Rep. Rolanda Hollis, D-Birmingham, said during debate that parents don’t know everything that their child does.

“As a parent you may not know, and here I don’t know if the counselor or the principal can call you in to say ‘Hey this is what we smelled on your kid’s jacket, how are we gonna handle this?’ But instead you got me going to a class for something I don’t even know about,” she said.

When asked after the meeting about Morris’ concerns about the bill’s language regarding age, Sellers said parents should “stop making excuses” for their children.

“You know whether or not your child is smoking marijuana. If someone lives in your house, you know they’re smoking marijuana because you can smell it. It’s a distinct smell,” he said.

Keep reading