Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 18 of 18rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

Yes, if only to get them to devote their time to something more useful.

If it keeps them away from Breitbart and the like it has to be good.

I don't know how it can be enforced though.

no, they should be barred from twitface though.

The legislation bans under-sixteens from social media websites not from using smartphones.

How on earth can that be enforced corby?

Even the under 16s don't say Twitface.

"The bill introduced in the Australian parliament on Thursday provides for developing an age verification system that could use biometrics or government-issued identification cards."

All of which sounds like unenforceable nonsense corby.

For a country that prides itself on its reputation as easy-going and relaxed the don't half like a rule to curb a freedom.

Maybe it's not all tinnies and thongs after all, cobber.

Unenforceable, and even they are spouting using an application that hasnt been written.

//The legislation bans under-sixteens from social media websites not from using smartphones.//

And what exactly do you think most kids use their phones for?

 

That is the parents' job. They are responsible for what their offspring get access to at various ages. IMO No under 16 year old should have access to the dodgy parts of the internet when not being supervised by an adult, so giving them a "smart" phone to use on their own is irresponsible.

As one of the things they use them for is meeting bus fare requirements (I see many examples of this) then such a ban would be totally stupid, not to mention making the driver's job more irksome. Why can't the proposers of legislation actually try to research and think through their ideas before launching such idiocy on the general public ?  With dumbos like this running the world, no wonder it's in such a mess.

That's what cash is for, Canary.

It's one of those rare moments I agree entirely Canary.

I agree there are problems but this nis certainly not the way to resolve it.

I'm afraid that ship has sailed now OG, Genie aint going back in the bottle.

You obviously don't use the bus very often OG if you don't realise what an absolute pain handling cash is for drivers (and passengers).

That's what conductors were for.

More indicators of how we are going backwards in the rush to rely on tech, or remove service from customers/passengers.

Conductors went years ago, and I bet you would complain if your fare went up to npay for them.

We are where we are though, as I said above the Genie wont go back in the bottle now.

 

The perils of progress OG, nothing to put on my roses now horses have disappeared from our roads 🤣

1 to 18 of 18rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Should Children Under 16 Be Barred From Smartphones?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.