Facebook Agrees To User Safety Plan

Facebook has reached an agreement with the attorneys general of 49 states and the District of Columbia to develop and enhance controls to protect minors from inappropriate content. This follows a similar commitment from MySpace several months ago. The lone holdout in each case was Texas. News.com notes: "In the deal, the social network has agreed to develop age verification technology, send warning messages when an under-18 user may be giving personal information to an unknown adult, restrict the ability for people to change their ages on the site, and keep abreast of inappropriate content and harassment on the site. While the agreement is with U.S. state authorities, Kelly said that the tools deployed will apply to Facebook's international users as well. More than half of the site's 70 million users are outside the U.S."

Comments

For God's sake

[Rik Sweeney]

Maybe Facebook should also be made to come round to people's houses and teach them how to wipe their arses properly.

While Facebook might have to provide some responsibility, the 49 states and Columbia should actually tell the PARENTS to supervise their child's usage of the internet.

Re:For God's sake

[Grimbleton]

I agree. I'm sick and tired of the government stepping in where they shouldn't. Aw, little Susy sent out naked pictures to her friends? Great, let's educate her and her parents, not hold the service she used to perform an action with responsible. Where's the personal responsibility these days?

Re:For God's sake

[DrLang21]

The reality of moves like this is that unless they require some kind of objective identification or background checks on every single user, minors will start accounts saying that they are older and pedophiles will start accounts saying that they are younger. The amusing conclusion is that pedophiles will only be hitting on eachother.

Re:For God's sake

[swillden]

While Facebook might have to provide some responsibility, the 49 states and Columbia should actually tell the PARENTS to supervise their child's usage of the internet.

I'd like to see them implement parental supervision features, so that I can easily review what my kids are doing.

The idea that parents should actively supervise and participate in their children's Internet usage SOUNDS good, but in practice it means two things: I have to spend all of my free time watching what my kids do on the net (leaving me no time for slashdot!), and I have to severely limit their Internet usage.

This is especially problematic for parents with more than one or two children. I have four (ages 6 through 14), all of whom spend a significant time on the net. I limit them to 90 minutes per day of computer time, including school work, and while many people consider that excessively restrictive, it would still mean that I have to spend six hours per day watching them compute. That's obviously not practical.

There are various workarounds, of course. For example, I use remote desktop tools (VNC, actually, since their computers run Ubuntu) to spot check what they're doing from my own computer; I look at their browser histories; and I require them to use the e-mail accounts I set up for them, and which automatically forward me copies of everything they receive (in practice, their e-mail volume is too high for me to monitor, so I have filters that automatically shuffle their mail off to folders, which I spot-check).

None of this is hidden from them, BTW. They're well aware that Mom and Dad have access to all of this -- and probably believe we have access to stuff that we don't.

Another thing that helps is that the computers are in public areas of the house, and we encourage tattling. That only helps with overt stuff ("Moommmm, Ethan is watching Youtube videos with bad woooorrrdss!" -- if you've spent much time around kids I'm sure you can imagine the exact tone). More subtle things, like kids giving away too much personal information in chat rooms are harder. We've taught them about the issues, and we mostly ban chatting at all, except with RL friends, but it's hard to convince kids to take those things seriously.

This all works to some degree, but it's a big workload for my wife and I, and it's incomplete. Browser history tells you what sites they visit, but not what they do on those sites, and sites like myspace and facebook offer a wide variety of activities, some of which are acceptable and some of which are not. I don't really have a good way of knowing what they're doing without watching, either directly or via VNC.

The bottom line is that supervising your kids' Internet usage sounds simple in theory, but it's pretty darned hard to do effectively in practice, even for a nerd like me. The average parent really has no option beyond watching over their shoulders.

Re:For God's sake

[russotto]

The idea that parents should actively supervise and participate in their children's Internet usage SOUNDS good, but in practice it means two things: I have to spend all of my free time watching what my kids do on the net (leaving me no time for slashdot!), and I have to severely limit their Internet usage.

Your kids, your problem. Don't try to screw up the Internet for the rest of us in an attempt to make it kid-safe enough to reduce your workload.

Texas, huh

[patio11]

You know, any time its 49 to 1 on states in America, you can be pretty sure that Texas is sitting out. Or perhaps Utah. Just once, I'd like to have a boring, milquetoast state like Rhode Island try to have a bit of a personality. "We're not a state! We're a Commonwealth! And we won't be having with any of your Internets!"

Hey, it could happen.

Age of majority

[NoobixCube]

I've always thought the broad-sweeping American-influenced use of age 18 on the internet is amazingly arrogant and blind. 18 is the arbitrary age of majority in some western cultures. In other western cultures, it's 21. In Japan (and perhaps other Asian countries, though I don't know), it's 20. Age of majority is probably even lower in some countries, and even higher in others.

beginning of the end?

[mrcdeckard]

before i get modded to hell, i'm usually not a doomsdayer.

however, i think this may be the point that we have all been dreading since the internet began -- the day we have to provide *real* identification to get access to casual (non commerce) sites.

i guess the glass-half-full part of me is wondering how facebook can verify age without compromising anonymity (and convenience for that matter).

one way to address this is to not allow unverified people to network with minors (what adults really would, anyway, unless they're spying on them or, well, the pedophiles this system is trying to address). although this is a bit ageist in that this would require minors to provide real id. this doesn't actually address the issue, only postpones full-compliance to future generations. . .

so, yeah. once this becomes commonplace (ie. when the infrastructure is in place), i can see the day when we all have to show our (real) ID at the door of every site we go to.

often it occurs to me that i will be looking back to these days and think, "wow, those were the days when the internet was free," as i hold my nationalIDcard up to the computer screen to be scanned . . .

mr c

Re:beginning of the end?

[FiestaFan]

one way to address this is to not allow unverified people to network with minors (what adults really would, anyway, unless they're spying on them or, well, the pedophiles this system is trying to address). What about someone who is 18 sending a message to someone who is 17? Or a grandmother sending her 13 year old granddaughter a message? Or a myriad of other circumstances?

Radical solution:

[Ethanol-fueled]

Why not just outlaw internet use for those under 18? Before you laugh or mod me troll, hear me out:

Youngsters don't need the internet to do research as they could go to a library and do their research the old-fashioned way. Youngsters have cell phones and text messaging, and if they don't have that then they could play sports or participate in a myriad of activities for social bonding.

The internet is like a playboy magazine: it has articles totally unrelated to sex, and it has the pictures - would you let a minor get a playboy as long as they promise to "just read the articles"? Well, maybe. But if shit happens then then the youngster can take the blame and the punishment. Not their parents, not their ISP, not MySpace or Facebook.

Do all underage people who drink cause trouble? No, but if they do something stupid enough to endanger themselves or others, then most of those will be caught and punished.

Re:Radical solution:

[FiestaFan]

Yes, and the same with TV and radio.

Re:Radical solution:

[Anonymous Coward]

HOW exactly was THIS modded UP?! I mean WHAT?! Even as AC, I am shocked.

Oh sure, I am 18 now and working as search engine optimizer and PHP coder. Learning these skills from library, with years old books, etc. without the access to internet would have been kinda... impossible? People don't NEED the internet and neither they NEED moder medicine. Maybe we should also make medicine illegal for people under 18 because some can become drug addicts.

Re:Radical solution:

[Anonymous Coward]

The same AC here again (Hmmh... Should get registered some day as I comment about daily but really, I hate registarations of all kinds).

Reasonable exemption for academic or vocational use? That just won't cut it, really. If I hadn't had full access to internet when I was 10 years old, I wouldn't have though "This thing is awesome! I want to make webpages too!" and asked my father to teach me how to do that (HTML). I wouldn't have started my first game reviews website (only lasted two months or so, though. ;) ) at 13 years old age and constantly remembered how interesting this stuff is and really started coding at 16 years old. This REALLY wouldn't have happened if I could have only asked permission for vocational or academic use but it has changed my life entirely and I dare to say, to positive direction.

I started using IRC at 13 years old and met a lot of people. I also met these people in real life. Instead of telling me "never meet strangers in real life" my father had told me "IF you meet people from the internet in real life, do it in a public place, ask what they look like so you can leave after seeing them before they see you and if you don't want to tell me, tell some friend of yours what you are going to do and leave him their phone number or any other info you have about them.". I followed these advice. Some of the people I met were total psycopaths and scitshophreniacs who tried to offer me some pills and such but I refused. However, other people... Through IRC and later in real life, I met some of the most awesome people I still feel privileged to know. These people have been there for me in my most suicidal teen age angsts, helped me in school stuff when I have needed and generally helped me talk about EVERYTHING I wouldn't have wanted to talk face to face with people I see daily, such as my sexuality.

THIS would have NEVER happened with reasonable exemptions that could be made for academic or vocational use.

I have learned so much by skype conversing from late evenings to 6 am with total strangers from other side of the world. About other worldviews, about cultures, about people themselves.

Internet has had a huge positive effect on my, and certainly many others' lives, that just wouldn't have happened if it had been regulated. I see no reasonalbe alternative to progress, freedom, socialicing and learning.

So please excuse my knee-jerk reaction. :)

Re:Radical solution:

[Nathrael]

Yeah, right. Because a small minority is unable to use something properly, outlaw it for all others as well. Make all people suffer because some people made errors. With the same mentality, pretty much everything should be outlawed, since you can always find a way to misuse something.

Re:Radical solution:

[Wavebreak]

There's such a thing as being overprotective, and this is it.

Re:Radical solution:

[digitig]

Why not just outlaw internet use for those under 18? Before you laugh or mod me troll, hear me out: Youngsters don't need the internet to do research as they could go to a library and do their research the old-fashioned way. Youngsters have cell phones and text messaging, and if they don't have that then they could play sports or participate in a myriad of activities for social bonding. Because growing up is about learning to live in the adult world. If we keep kids wrapped in cotton-wool and safe from the world until their 18th birthday, when you turn them loose they just won't be able to deal with what they encounter. Parenting, education and so on are largely about getting the kids used to the risks of real life, in a controlled way. Yes, that has its own risks -- kids will have to be exposed to the dangers of the real world in order to learn to cope, and sometimes they will fail to cope. So the risks need to be managed and controlled, but we must be aware that if we eliminate risk kids won't learn to deal with it. There will be tragedies, but that's because life is dangerous, not because we've under-legislated.

except

[nguy]

Except that the age of consent is actually lower in many countries, even if their age of majority is the same or higher.

So, for example, in many places in Europe, the age of majority is 18, but the age of consent is 15. Even in the US, there are state-by-state discrepancies.

Re:except

[NoobixCube]

I was going to mention age of consent, but I thought it would seem like too much of a pointless rant if I went off on that tangent. In Australia, some states say 16, some say 17, and Victoria actually has a special provision, where the age of consent is 16, but if either or both people are under the age of consent, then there can't be more than two years' age difference. Strange, but at least it stops people from becoming sex offenders if they're 16 with a 15 year old girlfriend or boyfriend.

Re:except

[LilGuy]

You then did proceed to mention age of consent and you were correct in your thinking that it might end up a pointless rant.

Well done.

Sounds like a good idea to me.

[elucido]

In my opinion, I see no reason for minors to be using the same social networking services as adults, and in my opinion if they are under 15 they shouldn't be on social networking sites at all.

Can anything good come from letting minors access the adult oriented internet? We don't let them into clubs and bars, so why Myspace and Facebook?

Lets nationalize the age of consent.

[elucido]

Lets solve this problem once and for all and come up with ONE age of consent. One age which applies to all US territories and the internet, so that adults can know when they are breaking the law.

To have no age of consent is equal to having the drinking age be different in every state and having some states have bars with minors in them and other states having bars set to be over 21.

You cannot govern this way.

Sound Bite Security

[arthurpaliden]

Sounds good and does absolutly nothing. The best was to keep children safe on the internet is called ... wait for it ... PARENTING. So put the household computer in a high traffic area by the kitchen and take and interest in what your kids are doing.

Re:Sound Bite Security

[AikonMGB]

Bingo! As your kids are growing up, do not give them a computer with net access in their own room. Keep an eye on them; they are in uncharted territory and are learning as they go. Help them learn some of the dangers and pitfalls of the internet.

As they grow up, you can gradually give them more privacy with computer and internet issues (as you should be giving them in other things as well), easing them into "adulthood." I don't understand how people expect an individual that has been sheltered her entire life to magically and suddenly be ready to take on the internet at midnight on her 18th birthday.

You have to gradually ease them into it, so that by the time they turn 18, they are ready for the internet. Because you helped to prepare them, their 18th birthday will simply be an official sign-post, but they won't notice any difference at all, since you've already reached the point where you trust your children to be responsible.

Aikon-

How do you verify a minor?

[clickety6]

I've seen sites that ask for adult verification via a credit card number but how do you verify that a minor is a minor? See if they don't have a credit card?

Re:Well get used to it.

[c6gunner]

Because the voters seem to be damn inclined for the government to take care of their...

retirement
health care
schooling of their children
mortgages

How are those three a function of government? I really don't understand how people who send their kids to public school can complain about government censorship related to children. Really, what do you think goes on in your schools?

Apparently, NOT learning how to count :)

You're absolutely right, though. The more "liberal" (really socialist) a country gets, the more it becomes dependant on the government. You can't offer people cradle-to-grave welfare, free education, pretty much guaranteed medical help, etc, etc, without at least a small segment of your society regressing to the point of becoming children in adult bodies. If you then expect those individuals to raise children of their own, you're just asking for problems.

GoodLuckWithThat

[keirre23hu]

Because noone could ever get another free email from Yahoo/MSN/Google/RediffMail/DMX/insert free email provider here and register for a new account if they are operating under nefarious purposes, you know, like spammers do.

Age verification technology - how will this work without requiring giving more personal information to facebook, who will then use it to further tail advertisements, could you imagine if they had your postal address?

The only part that makes sense is alerting when minors send information to adults.... but to do that it means monitoring personal communication without a warrant, and how do they really _know_ the child and adult know each other in a non-threatening way, and on the other side, how do they know that they arent relatives or have some other benign relationship... The solution is for parents to be parents and stop letting the computer/tv/playstation/wii parent your kids for you... nobody forced you to become a parent, take some responsibility.

"In the deal, the social network has agreed to develop age verification technology, send warning messages when an under-18 user may be giving personal information to an unknown adult, restrict the ability for people to change their ages on the site, and keep abreast of inappropriate content and harassment on the site. While the agreement is with U.S. state authorities, Kelly said that the tools deployed will apply to Facebook's international users as well. More than half of the site's 70 million users are outside the U.S."

Minors are the exception, adults are the rule...

[Manip]

Honestly why must adults who make up most of the population suffer for the minority?

Just add a "Kid Flag" to the browsers. Have the parents set the "Kid Flag" and have sites have to enforce rules around it.

e.g.
If there is a kids flag either the service doesn't work or has reduced functionality.

This allows parents to decide on the what age their kids are wise enough to use said services and puts the power entirely with the parents (as it should be).

Stop trying to get everyone else to be a parent. I mean it seems like teachers, police, equipment makers, service providers, etc all have to be some kind of parent for all these silly like kids that these morons keep dropping into the world.

Frankly the DNA pool might be better if some of the less intelligent kids (or kids with less intelligent parents) got taken out.

Parents are the issue!

[Droidism]

Facebook IS the issue. It's Never the parents. All parents are perfect with the upbringing of their child. point the finger at... media. gta. facebook.

Re:Minors are the exception, adults are the rule..

[computational super]

Just add a "Kid Flag" to the browsers. Have the parents set the "Kid Flag" and have sites have to enforce rules around it.

Or even better... have the adult population actually grow up, think rationally for once and realize... it's a computer. It can't kill you (unless you bring it into the bathtub when it's plugged in). It can't hurt you (unless you drop it on your foot). All it can do is expose you to other peoples thoughts and ideas. If being exposed to other people's thoughts and ideas is all it takes to harm you, at ANY age, the gene pool is better off without you in it.

Then they were unethical

[elucido]

Why did they open their product to children anyway?
They should have kept it as an adult college generaton product. I'd probably still be using it if they didn't open it to everyone.