Obligation 27 (1) Subject to section 29, an operator must, with respect to every regulated social media service specified by regulations made by the Governor in Council under subsection (5) that it operates, implement adequate age-verification or age-estimation measures designed to prevent a person under the age of 16 from being able to have an account with, or be otherwise registered with, the service.

Adequacy of measures

(2) In order to determine whether the measures implemented under subsection (1) are adequate, the Commission must be satisfied that the measures

(a) are effective;

(b) do not involve the collection or use of personal information other than for age-verification or age-estimation purposes;

(c) provide for the destruction of personal information that is collected for age-verification or age-estimation purposes once the verification or estimation is completed;

(d) provide for the protection of personal information that is collected for age-verification or age-estimation purposes until that information is destroyed; and

(e) comply with any other requirement specified in the regulations.

[–] quaff@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

For sure. Super vague. There are discussions happening on the mastodon side of this. And this bill is terrible.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I really do not think the fediverse is what they are thinking of when they say traditional, or whatever word they used, when they thought of this. I think the closest they will come to the fediverse is Blusky.

[–] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

I don't think they're even vaguely aware that the term "fediverse" exists, much less what it actually is.

[–] quaff@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/45-1/bill/C-34/first-reading

According to the full text, there's no such consideration regarding "traditional" the only thing that I can see that qualifies a "social media" service as "regulated" is the number of users, and that's apparently TBD by some yet to be appointed council.

Fediverse will be hard to enforce compliance, so I don't know what they'll do to try and force age gating on us.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We will have to see because, like every other technological block in life the kids will find away around it before the adults do.

[–] quaff@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

If only the people writing these bills were as sensible as you. Unfortunately these people believe age gating works. All it'll do is require more personal data to be tracked everywhere.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I may by too cynical now, but I doubt the authors give a shit that kids will work around it. They are scratching the back of someone and they are getting what they want.

[–] quaff@lemmy.ca 1 points 14 hours ago

There's a clip in the CBC article linked in this post, the minister that tabled this bill was asked about age verification's effectiveness and kids getting around it in Australia.

The response was basically: Just because it doesn't work, doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.. It's a brain dead take.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

Well you see all the failed things that happen in Australia have to be tried here: see phoenix pay as an example.