Post by @pre@boing.world

2026-06-15 09:43 UTC

OBrien on the radio thinks that its okay to ban kids from Youtube even though their exam revision videos are on youtube, because the revision videos will just end up somewhere else. He thinks though that the suicide encouragement and terrible anorexia mutual support will not simply end up somewhere else I guess. 🤷‍♂️ "No downside to this at all" he reckons. 🤣 "Nobody sensible can be against this ban" This is what irks me most. The absolute refusal to see any issues at all in the ban. Just refusing to understand that there's any support help or encouragement for kids on these forums. That they are only places for radicalisation and bullying. TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, Twitch, X, Threads, Facebook and Kick. I note that Bluesky didn't make the blacklist. I expect it'll be added during debate. Can't list everything though, so the kids will surely just go to whoever isn't listed? 4-chan seems to not be included? What a strange list. I don't use any of them besides Youtube so won't be forced into ID checks for them myself. My youtube account is itself over 18 years old so don't think they'll ask. #ukpol #socialMedia

Replies (8)

@chewie@mammut.gogreenit.net 2026-06-15 23:05

@pre@boing.world don't count on it. A couple of years ago, I wanted to buy some blades from amazon, and they wanted government ID.... my account was created in the year 2000... idiots

Open ##3329068
@pre@boing.world 2026-06-15 10:12

Sounds like parents are happy because now when their ten year old says "Can I have a phone, can I have instagram?" they apparently feel 'supported by the government' in saying no. Could we not do that without all the surveillance infrastructure and corporate monopolies for ID-providing services just by having official government advice without any enforcement that children shouldn't have these ten apps until they are seventeen? Seems pretty ridiculous that parents feel like they can only say no to their kids if it's backed up by the government and it's police and armies.

Open ##5245744
@pre@boing.world 2026-06-15 19:08

FWIW the reason James OBrian blocked me on Bluesky was for pointing out that its always centrists who build the machinery of the fascist state and they think they are doing a good thing while they do it. Think that one was jury trials rather than internet publishing though.

Open ##5245749
@pre@boing.world 2026-06-16 10:17

In fact The Prime Minister held the press-conference announcing the new policy in the toxic waste dump itself. He was then pelted with huge gobbets of radioactive goo by the denizens of the dump who may or may not be real people or in fact automatons created by the mad man who rules the place with the express purpose of destroying the prime minister and everything he stands for. 🤣 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWEcewY-jP0

Open ##5245751
@inpc@go.mxtthxw.art 2026-06-15 09:53

@pre@boing.world Kids going on darkweb for study help, what's the worst that could happen?

Open ##5245752
@inpc@go.mxtthxw.art 2026-06-15 09:55

@pre@boing.world 'Nobody sensible would be against this'. Thank gawd for that, last thing I need is anyone deeming me to be sensible.

Open ##5245754
@benjamineskola@hachyderm.io 2026-06-15 13:55

@pre@boing.world I think that algorithmic feeds might be part of the definition, so that would leave Bluesky and Mastodon out of scope — but it’s unclear as yet what they actual definition is, and may depend partly on whether MPs have heard about it and whether it sounds scary to them.

Open ##5245755
@ehproque@neopaquita.es 2026-06-15 18:52

@pre@boing.world "the revision videos will just end up somewhere else" Unlike questionable content, which of course is impossible to obtain outside of "approved channels", after all porn and fascism weren't invented until internet use was widespread

Open ##5245760