If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(RYOT.org)   California's new "Erase Law" will let minors delete embarrassing posts from the Internet for good before they get screwed out of jobs because of them. If only the law were for adults too   (ryot.org) divider line 102
    More: Misc, online, Googles  
•       •       •

3804 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Mar 2014 at 9:45 PM (30 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



102 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-03 08:52:55 PM
California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.
 
2014-03-03 09:47:55 PM
Yeah, this will happen...
 
2014-03-03 09:50:02 PM
Shall we allow them to delete their embarrassingly bad grades, also?

Because nothing says "successful policy" like indoctrinating our kids into a culture of 'poor decisions have no consequences".
 
2014-03-03 09:50:15 PM
FTA: All websites, including social media giants Facebook and Twitter, will now be required to give those under 18 an opportunity to delete harmful photos and posts.

Because if there's one thing California needs its legislature to spend time on, it's unenforceable laws.
 
2014-03-03 09:50:24 PM
This will not go over well in Russia.
 
2014-03-03 09:50:46 PM
cdn01.cdnwp.celebuzz.com
 
2014-03-03 09:51:24 PM
seems like it would be easier to just ban minors from the internet.
 
2014-03-03 09:52:56 PM
Yea, good luck with that CA.

So what relative of a CA politician owns a patent on "deleting shiat off the intwebz" and will now expect the ISPs to figure out how to do it and then pay him for it?
 
2014-03-03 09:53:14 PM

generallyso: FTA: All websites, including social media giants Facebook and Twitter, will now be required to give those under 18 an opportunity to delete harmful photos and posts.

Because if there's one thing California needs its legislature to spend time on, it's unenforceable laws.


This

Sticky Hands: seems like it would be easier to just ban minors from the internet.


And this.
 
2014-03-03 09:53:28 PM

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.


Huh.
Was thinking along the same lines of what California has jurisdiction over and what it doesn't.

I wonder if they can block an IP. Get major providers to block a specific address/site.

/Fark? Well...bye
 
2014-03-03 09:55:59 PM
Apparently California has never heard of The Streisand Effect.
 
2014-03-03 09:59:31 PM

Resident Muslim: I wonder if they can block an IP. Get major providers to block a specific address/site.


It's far, far more likely that major website and forum operators will simply IDP California.
 
2014-03-03 10:00:45 PM
Have any of these legislators ever used the internet for anything other than porn?  Google Cache? Archive.org?  and I'm sure there's others.
 
2014-03-03 10:02:38 PM
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-03 10:02:46 PM
This ranks up there with "series of tubes". These people are in no position to dictate rules on something they cannot understand.
 
2014-03-03 10:04:46 PM

super_grass: [img.fark.net image 177x278]


truly epic 4chan meme, bro
 
2014-03-03 10:05:04 PM

God-is-a-Taco: This ranks up there with "series of tubes". These people are in no position to dictate rules on something they cannot understand.


This is why we need term limits and younger blood in office.
 
2014-03-03 10:06:03 PM

generallyso: FTA: All websites, including social media giants Facebook and Twitter, will now be required to give those under 18 an opportunity to delete harmful photos and posts.

Because if there's one thing California needs its legislature to spend time on, it's unenforceable laws.


Facebook and Twitter absolutely will have to comply with it though. They are both based in Cali. Of course it will  be laughably ineffective but they will have to do something to appear to comply.
 
2014-03-03 10:06:11 PM
Would this apply to the NSA?
 
2014-03-03 10:06:18 PM

SevenizGud: Shall we allow them to delete their embarrassingly bad grades, also?

Because nothing says "successful policy" like indoctrinating our kids into a culture of 'poor decisions have no consequences".


Not that I agree with this law at all but its a reactionary law stemming from a real social problem.  Just because actions have consequences doesn't mean those consequences should be of a nuclear proportion.  It seems like more than ever before the a persons minor transgressions from being a dumb kid are following them around for their entire life.  Yes actions should have consequences but the consequences should be proportional to the action.
 
2014-03-03 10:07:05 PM
To bring an enlightened and conscise opinion how this works on the Internet, I throw it to our expert commentator, Morbo.
 
2014-03-03 10:07:26 PM
31.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-03-03 10:08:00 PM
Huh.  I've never seen a state so desperate to get one of their major industries to leave.
 
2014-03-03 10:08:26 PM
Everyone knows posting stupid shiat on the internet is like pissing in the pool: to get rid of it, you gotta drain the entire thing.
 
2014-03-03 10:10:53 PM

Warlordtrooper: Not that I agree with this law at all but its a reactionary law stemming from a real social problem.  Just because actions have consequences doesn't mean those consequences should be of a nuclear proportion.  It seems like more than ever before the a persons minor transgressions from being a dumb kid are following them around for their entire life.  Yes actions should have consequences but the consequences should be proportional to the action.


Don't bother man. The guy is a terrible troll.
 
2014-03-03 10:11:15 PM

Warlordtrooper: SevenizGud: Shall we allow them to delete their embarrassingly bad grades, also?

Because nothing says "successful policy" like indoctrinating our kids into a culture of 'poor decisions have no consequences".

Not that I agree with this law at all but its a reactionary law stemming from a real social problem.  Just because actions have consequences doesn't mean those consequences should be of a nuclear proportion.  It seems like more than ever before the a persons minor transgressions from being a dumb kid are following them around for their entire life.  Yes actions should have consequences but the consequences should be proportional to the action.


I do feel sorry for kids today. Prior to the internet, your "permanent record" was a bullshiat threat made up by teachers to make you straighten up. There were plenty of times there wasn't enough proof that a kid did something, but they knew the kid did enough to tell them you can't do that sort of thing.

Now you can get in permanent trouble for things that used to be quietly forgiven after a stern talking to. Imagine, how political candidates will work in 20 years. Will we be so jaded that being caught with ultraporn and murderhatedeathkill speech is par for the course or will it devolve even worse into Idiotocracy/Jerry Springer hooting and gotcha games.
 
2014-03-03 10:12:22 PM

gaspode: Facebook and Twitter absolutely will have to comply with it though. They are both based in Cali. Of course it will be laughably ineffective but they will have to do something to appear to comply.


That's an interesting theory but let's consider that if  the Syrian Electronic Army has an account on Twitter; ergo, Twitter maintains the accounts of a known terrorist group...thus...wait for it....

...any stockholder or any one generating revenue for Twitter would be materially supporting a company that provides material support for a terrorist group.

just sayin...
 
2014-03-03 10:12:29 PM
So I can make everyone in the world delete my Saturn wallpaper with the shemale vids folder?
 
2014-03-03 10:15:13 PM
cdn.uproxx.com
 
2014-03-03 10:18:19 PM

SevenizGud: Shall we allow them to delete their embarrassingly bad grades, also?

Because nothing says "successful policy" like indoctrinating our kids into a culture of 'poor decisions have no consequences".


But California.
 
2014-03-03 10:19:34 PM

God-is-a-Taco: super_grass: [img.fark.net image 177x278]

truly epic 4chan meme, bro


You saying it like half of the mee-mees on Fark aren't stolen from Reddit, which was stolen from 4chan, which was stolen from elsewhere.
 
2014-03-03 10:19:41 PM

Warlordtrooper: It seems like more than ever before the a persons minor transgressions from being a dumb kid are following them around for their entire life.


If a kid (or adult) is stupid enough to use their real identity on the internet for anything other than professional matters, they deserve whatever reputation they make for themselves on the internet.

Also, unless there's photos, video, or other solid proof that a particular post or profile is yours, most employers won't take a chance of denying a job or promotion based on something that is just as likely to have been posted by one of the hundred thousand or so other people named "John Smith".
 
2014-03-03 10:20:14 PM

Warlordtrooper: SevenizGud: Shall we allow them to delete their embarrassingly bad grades, also?

Because nothing says "successful policy" like indoctrinating our kids into a culture of 'poor decisions have no consequences".

Not that I agree with this law at all but its a reactionary law stemming from a real social problem.  Just because actions have consequences doesn't mean those consequences should be of a nuclear proportion.  It seems like more than ever before the a persons minor transgressions from being a dumb kid are following them around for their entire life.  Yes actions should have consequences but the consequences should be proportional to the action.


Here's another plan.  Teach kids that actions have consequences when they are young.  Stop wrapping them in bubble wrap every day of their lives and let them scrape their knees and break the occasional bone.  Casts and stitches make you think about where you went wrong.

Let them know long before they are old enough to take a picture(or let someone else take a picture) of them shoving a popsicle in their cooter and it ends up on the internet.
 
2014-03-03 10:20:54 PM

Fano: Warlordtrooper: SevenizGud: Shall we allow them to delete their embarrassingly bad grades, also?

Because nothing says "successful policy" like indoctrinating our kids into a culture of 'poor decisions have no consequences".

Not that I agree with this law at all but its a reactionary law stemming from a real social problem.  Just because actions have consequences doesn't mean those consequences should be of a nuclear proportion.  It seems like more than ever before the a persons minor transgressions from being a dumb kid are following them around for their entire life.  Yes actions should have consequences but the consequences should be proportional to the action.

I do feel sorry for kids today. Prior to the internet, your "permanent record" was a bullshiat threat made up by teachers to make you straighten up. There were plenty of times there wasn't enough proof that a kid did something, but they knew the kid did enough to tell them you can't do that sort of thing.

Now you can get in permanent trouble for things that used to be quietly forgiven after a stern talking to. Imagine, how political candidates will work in 20 years. Will we be so jaded that being caught with ultraporn and murderhatedeathkill speech is par for the course or will it devolve even worse into Idiotocracy/Jerry Springer hooting and gotcha games.



It's as if we'll have to mature as a civilization in order to continue to function.

Perhaps its not so bad after all.
 
2014-03-03 10:23:07 PM
This is an excellent proposal.

Youth is supposed to be about "entering the world", learning, trying, experiencing, expressing yourself and deciding who you want to be prior to any other entities deciding who you should be.
 
2014-03-03 10:23:13 PM

gaspode: Facebook and Twitter absolutely will have to comply with it though. They are both based in Cali. Of course it will be laughably ineffective but they will have to do something to appear to comply.


You seem to have mistaken Facebook and Twitter for small, local companies instead of immensely wealthy transnational businesses. If a particular region annoys them they can just switch to a different office.
 
2014-03-03 10:23:44 PM

Callous: Here's another plan. Teach kids that actions have consequences when they are young. Stop wrapping them in bubble wrap every day of their lives and let them scrape their knees and break the occasional bone. Casts and stitches make you think about where you went wrong.

Let them know long before they are old enough to take a picture(or let someone else take a picture) of them shoving a popsicle in their cooter and it ends up on the internet.


What?!?!?!
no, an intenet without cootersicles is an internet i don't want.
 
2014-03-03 10:23:54 PM
By requiring that websites extend this choice to minors, the bill sets up a big task for online companies. They'll now have to figure out how to determine which users are under 18 and in California.

Well, you could just give the same feature to everybody.  Implementing this sort of thing can be a pain in the ass, but on the surface it doesn't sound much different than the laws they already have in the EU.
 
2014-03-03 10:24:15 PM
this won't undo all adolescent indescretions

lafashionspot.com
 
2014-03-03 10:25:43 PM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-03-03 10:29:21 PM

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.


Something being impossible or not legally enforceable has not stopped the politicians in this state before.  Why would they care now?
 
2014-03-03 10:33:58 PM

OgreMagi: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: California will be shocked to discover large parts of the Internet don't care about California laws.

Something being impossible or not legally enforceable has not stopped the politicians in this state before.  Why would they care now?


They probably think they have sway over bay area tech companies.
 
2014-03-03 10:38:04 PM

MooseUpNorth: t's far, far more likely that major website and forum operators will simply IDP California.


Heh. California on its own is the sixth largest economy in the world. That's pretty much not going to happen. And since a lot of these sites are headquartered in LA or Silicon Valley, they're quite within reach.

It's technically impossible to totally eliminate something from the Internet but totally feasible to make sure the big providers will comply.
 
2014-03-03 10:41:28 PM

serial_crusher: By requiring that websites extend this choice to minors, the bill sets up a big task for online companies. They'll now have to figure out how to determine which users are under 18 and in California.

Well, you could just give the same feature to everybody.  Implementing this sort of thing can be a pain in the ass, but on the surface it doesn't sound much different than the laws they already have in the EU.


The EU version of these laws would never survive our first amendment, and the wording of this law seems tailored to avoid having it struck down on those grounds.... but it renders it functionally useless.  

You can delete your  own copies of your  own posts.  If I quote your embarrassing post and say, "Look at this idiot who just embarrassed himself!" you don't get to remove that.

So basically, this aspect of the law does almost exactly nothing that you can't already do on the majority (in terms of traffic, at least) of the sites where it might be relevant.

It's unenforceable, feel-good bullshiat that does absolutely nothing useful.
 
2014-03-03 10:44:23 PM

Cyclometh: MooseUpNorth: t's far, far more likely that major website and forum operators will simply IDP California.

Heh. California on its own is the sixth largest economy in the world. That's pretty much not going to happen. And since a lot of these sites are headquartered in LA or Silicon Valley, they're quite within reach.

It's technically impossible to totally eliminate something from the Internet but totally feasible to make sure the big providers will comply.


You can delete a tweet, you can delete a Facebook post.  If someone took a screen shot before it was deleted and posted it elsewhere Twitter and FB can't do anything about that.  Now the question is if CA would try to hold FB or Twitter responsible for for a screenshot of their site or an image that originated on their site that was posted elsewhere.
 
2014-03-03 10:46:58 PM
Hell, I'd be fine with the idea that any company that does business on the internet and allows minors the chance to comment the opportunity to wipe their account upon their 18th birthday and start over with only friends/contacts/age of account/whatever meaningless point or popularity system score is accrued.

Any kid who lies about their age to get around whatever restrictions are in place gets hosed and serves as a warning for the other ones. And at age 18, if they still want to be a farktard, you let them.
 
2014-03-03 10:47:05 PM

Callous: Warlordtrooper: SevenizGud: Shall we allow them to delete their embarrassingly bad grades, also?

Because nothing says "successful policy" like indoctrinating our kids into a culture of 'poor decisions have no consequences".

Not that I agree with this law at all but its a reactionary law stemming from a real social problem.  Just because actions have consequences doesn't mean those consequences should be of a nuclear proportion.  It seems like more than ever before the a persons minor transgressions from being a dumb kid are following them around for their entire life.  Yes actions should have consequences but the consequences should be proportional to the action.

Here's another plan.  Teach kids that actions have consequences when they are young.  Stop wrapping them in bubble wrap every day of their lives and let them scrape their knees and break the occasional bone.  Casts and stitches make you think about where you went wrong.

Let them know long before they are old enough to take a picture(or let someone else take a picture) of them shoving a popsicle in their cooter and it ends up on the internet.


Exactly this!

The root cause is either a lack of education or sheer ignorance/stupidity. Instead of addressing the symptoms, address the root cause -- teach kids how to use the internet responsibly and make them aware of possible consequences.
 
2014-03-03 10:47:06 PM
After reading the actual bill, I'm comfortable saying it's no big deal.  Anybody doing business in the EU is already dealing with worse.  Some key points:

- it only applies if you know they're a minor (but doesn't require you to ask).  So just don't ask for your users' birth dates.  "Are you over 13?" is enough to satisfy other federal laws, right?
- you don't have to provide a direct ability for the minor to delete it.  Just have to delete upon request.  Generally any web site that accepts user generated content has all the moderation capabilities they need to field these requests.  Lord knows we've all had a few fark posts get deleted in our time.
- You don't have to "delete" content, just render it invisible to other users.  The EU is stricter about actually deleting the stuff.

The big thing is that they restrict what kinds of ads you can show to known minors.  For most web sites this probably just means passing age and location info to your ad provider and making it their problem.  But I'd hate to be the ad provider.  Some of the items they list are things like spray paint.  So if you have a deal with Lowes to advertise their products, you have to have them label everything that might be a banned product.  Or you could just not show any Lowes ads to minors, but that would exclude a lot of items that aren't as dangerous as spray paint.  Like power tools.
 
2014-03-03 10:48:02 PM

Callous: You can delete a tweet, you can delete a Facebook post.  If someone took a screen shot before it was deleted and posted it elsewhere Twitter and FB can't do anything about that.  Now the question is if CA would try to hold FB or Twitter responsible for for a screenshot of their site or an image that originated on their site that was posted elsewhere.


I think it depends on the wording of the law. Probably impossible to enforce that way legally or technically.

The stuff that prompts these kinds of laws are why my son is 14 is has an old flip phone with texting disabled and isn't allowed to use Facebook or any other social media.
 
2014-03-03 10:48:04 PM
This is a stupid law.

Someone mentioned before about how elections will be once today's younger people are running for office and their Facebook and Twitter accounts come back to haunt them and I've wondered this as well...my guess is that the kids who didn't have access will be in great position over the kids who did simply because if they never had an account they wouldn't have had as much of a chance to post something stupid.
 
Displayed 50 of 102 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report