Connect with us
https://tickernews.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AmEx-Thought-Leaders.jpg

Tech

A trial is testing ways to enforce Australia’s under-16s social media ban

Published

on

A trial is testing ways to enforce Australia’s under-16s social media ban. But the tech is flawed

De Visu/Shutterstock

Alexia Maddox, La Trobe University; Luke Heemsbergen, Deakin University, and My Le, Deakin University

Australia’s move to ban under-16s from social media is receiving widespread praise. Other countries, including the United Kingdom, Ireland, Singapore and Japan, are also now reportedly considering similar moves.

The ban was legislated in November 2024 and is due to take effect in December 2025. The law says social media platforms can’t use official IDs such as passports to check Australian users’ ages, and shouldn’t track Australians. But it doesn’t specify the alternative.

To test alternative methods, the federal government commissioned a trial of currently available technologies designed to “assure” people’s age online. Run by the Age Check Certification Scheme, a UK-based company specialising in testing and certifying identity verification systems, the trial is in its final stages. Results are expected at the end of June.

So what are the technologies being trialled? Are they likely to work? And how might they – and the social media ban itself – alter the relationship all of us have with our dominant forms of digital communication?

Dead ends for age verification

Age verification confirms a person’s exact age using verified sources such as government-issued IDs. Age assurance is a broader term. It can include estimation techniques such as analysing faces or metadata to determine if users meet age requirements.

In 2023 the federal government rejected mandating verification technologies for age-gating pornography sites. It found them “immature” with significant limitations. For example, database checks were costly and credit card verification could be easily worked around by minors.

Nonprofit organisation Digital Rights Watch also pointed out that such systems were easily bypassed using virtual private networks – or VPNs. These are simple tools that hide a user’s location to make it seem like they are from a different country.

Age assurance technologies bring different problems.

For example, the latest US National Academies of Sciences report shows that facial recognition systems frequently misidentify children because their facial features are still developing.

Improving these systems would require massive collections of children’s facial images. But international human rights law protects children’s privacy, making such data collection both legally and ethically problematic.

Flawed testing of innovative tech?

The age assurance technology trial currently includes 53 vendors hoping to win a contract for new innovative solutions.

A range of technology is being trialled. It includes facial recognition offering “selfie-based age checks” and hand movement recognition technologies that claim to calculate age ranges. It also includes bespoke block chains to store sensitive data on.

There are internal tensions about the trial’s design choices. These tensions centre on a lack of focus on ways to circumvent the technology, privacy implications, and verification of vendors’ efficacy claims.

While testing innovation is good, the majority of companies and startups such as IDVerse, AgeCheck, and Yoti in the trial, will likely not hold clout over the major tech platforms in focus (Meta, Google and Snap).

This divide reveals a fundamental problem: the companies building the checking tools aren’t the ones who must use them in the platforms targeted by the law. When tech giants don’t actively participate in developing solutions, they’re more likely to resist implementing them later.

Google recently proposed storing ID documents in Google Wallet for age verification.
nitpicker/Shutterstock

Unresponsive tech companies

Some major tech companies have shown little interest in engaging with the trial. For example, minutes from the trial’s March advisory board meeting reveal Apple “has been unresponsive, despite multiple outreach attempts”.

Apple has recently outlined a tool to transmit a declared age range to developers on request. Apple suggests iOS will default the age assurance on Apple devices to under 13 for kids’ accounts. This makes it the responsibility of parents to modify age, the responsibility of developers to recognise age, and the responsibility of governments to legislate when and what to do with an assured age per market.

Google’s recent Google Wallet proposal for age assurance also misses the mark on privacy concerns and usefulness.

The proposal would require people over 16 to upload government-issued IDs and link them to a Google account. It would also require people trust Google not track where they go across the internet, via a privacy-preserving technology that remains a promise.

Crucially, Meta’s social media platforms such as Facebook and Instagram also do not let you login with Google credentials. After all, they are competitors. This raises questions about the usefulness of Google’s proposal to assure age across social media platforms as part of the government’s under-16s ban.

Meanwhile, Google is also suggesting AI chatbots should be directly targeted and available to children under 13, creating something akin to a “social network of one”, which are out of scope of the ban.

Rather than engage with Australian age verification systems, companies such as Apple and Google are promoting their own solutions which seem to prioritise keeping or adding users to their services, or passing responsibility elsewhere.

For the targeted platforms that enable online social interactions, delay in engagement fits a broader pattern. For example, in January 2025, Mark Zuckerberg indicated Meta would push back more aggressively against international regulations that threaten its business model.

A shift in internet regulation

Australia’s approach to banning under-16s from using social media marks a significant shift in internet regulation. Rather than age-gating specific content such as porn or gambling, Australia is now targeting basic communication infrastructure – which is what social media have become.

It centres the problem on children being children, rather than on social media business models.

The result is limiting childrens’ digital rights with experimental technologies while doing little to address the source of perceived harm for all of us. It prioritises protection without considering children’s rights to access information and express themselves. This risks leaving the most vulnerable children being cut off from digital spaces essential to their success.

Australia’s approach puts paternal politics ahead of technical and social reality. As we get closer to the ban taking effect, we’ll see how this approach to regulate social communication platforms offers young people respite from the platforms their parents fear – yet continue to use everyday for their own basic communication needs.

Alexia Maddox, Senior Lecturer in Pedagogy and Education Futures, La Trobe University; Luke Heemsbergen, Senior Lecturer in Communication, Deakin University, and My Le, Graduate Researcher, School of Communication and Creative Arts, Deakin University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Ahron Young is an award winning journalist who has covered major news events around the world. Ahron is the Managing Editor and Founder of TICKER NEWS.

Continue Reading

Tech

What Saudi Arabia’s role in the Electronic Arts buyout tells us about ‘game-washing’

Published

on

What Saudi Arabia’s role in the Electronic Arts buyout tells us about image, power and ‘game-washing

Jacqueline Burgess, University of the Sunshine Coast

Video game publisher Electronic Arts (EA), one of the biggest video game companies in the world behind games such as The Sims and Battlefield, has been sold to a consortium of buyers for US$55 billion (about A$83 billion). It is potentially the largest-ever buyout funded by private equity firms. Not AI, nor mining or banking, but video games.

The members of the consortium include: Silver Lake Partners, an American private global equity firm focusing on technology; the Public Investment Fund (PIF), Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund; and the investment firm Affinity Partners, run by Jared Kushner, son-in-law of American President Donald Trump.

The consortium will purchase all of the publicly traded company’s shares, making it private. But while the consortium and EA’s shareholders will likely be celebrating – each share was valued at US$210, representing a 25% premium – it’s not all good news.

PIF acquiring EA raises concerns about possible “game-washing”, and less than ideal future business practices.

EA’s poor reputation

Video games are big business. The global video game industry is worth more than the film and music industries combined. But why would these buyers specifically want to buy EA, an entity that has won The Worst Company in America award twice?

It has been criticised for alleged poor labour practices, a focus on online gaming (even when it’s not ideal, such as in single-player stories), and a history of acquiring popular game studios and franchises and running them into the ground.

Players of some of EA’s most beloved franchises, such as The Sims, Dragon Age and Star Wars Battlefront II, believe the games have been negatively impacted due to the company meddling in production, and wanting to focus on online play and micro-transactions.

Microtransactions are small amounts of money paid to access, or potentially access, in-game items or currency. Over time, they can add up to a lot of money, and have even been linked to the creation of problem gambling behaviours. Unsurprisingly, they are not popular among players.

Current global economic stresses have affected video games and other high-tech industries. The development costs of a video game can be hundreds of millions of dollars. EA has reacted to its slowing growth by cancelling games and laying-off close to 2,000 workers since 2023. So a US$55 billion offer probably looked enticing.

Saudi Arabia’s investment spree

In recent years, the Saudi wealth fund has been on an entertainment investment splurge. Before this latest acquisition, PIF invested heavily in both golf and tennis.

It is a sponsor and official naming rights partner of both the Women’s Tennis Association rankings and the Association of Tennis Professionals rankings.

The wealth fund also helped establish the LIV Golf tour in 2022, in opposition to the Professional Golf Association (PGA). By offering huge sums of money, it was able to attract players away from the PGA. One player was reportedly offered US$125 million (A$189 million). This tactic worked; a merger was announced between LIV, the DPA (European golf tour) and the PGA (North American golf tour) in 2023, with PIF as the main funder.

PIF, via its subsidiaries, has also been acquiring stakes in other video game companies. For example, it is one of the largest shareholders in Nintendo, the developer behind Mario, and purchased Niantic (the company behind Pokémon Go) earlier this year for US$3.5 billion (A$5.3 billion)

Why does PIF want video game companies?

Live sport and video games have a few things in common: they are fun, engaging and entertaining. And being known for entertainment is good PR for a country that has been accused of human rights abuses.

PIF’s investment in sport has been called “sportswashing”: using an association with sport to counteract bad publicity and a tarnished moral reputation. Video games, with their interactivity and entertainment value, represent an opportunity for game-washing.

The fact EA owns many sports games’ franchises would also be a bonus, potentially allowing for further video game and sport collaboration. And the fact the video game industry is projected to keep growing globally makes it a good investment for an oil-rich nation looking to economically diversify.

Beyond game-washing concerns, we also need to pay attention to the type of buyout happening here. This is a “leveraged” buyout, meaning part of the purchase price – in this case US$20 billion (A$30 billion) – is funded as debt taken on by the company. So once the acquisition is complete, EA will have US$20 billion of new debt.

With all that new debt to service, it would only be natural to have concerns about more lay-offs, cost-cutting and increasing monetisation via strategies such as microtransactions. Ultimately, this would result in a poorer experience for players. It seems the more things change, the more they stay the same.The Conversation

Jacqueline Burgess, Lecturer in International Business, University of the Sunshine Coast

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Tech

80% of ransomware victims pay ransom, says report

Hiscox report reveals 80% of ransomware victims pay ransom, but only 60% recover data successfully

Published

on

Hiscox report reveals 80% of ransomware victims pay ransom, but only 60% recover data successfully

video
play-sharp-fill
In Short:
– Cyber attacks increasingly target businesses, with 80% of ransomware victims opting to pay ransoms.
– SMEs are often affected, with only 60% recovering data after paying ransoms amidst rising cyber insurance costs.
Cyber attacks are increasingly targeting sensitive business data, with many companies paying ransoms. A report from Hiscox indicates that 80% of businesses affected by ransomware over the past year opted to pay.The annual Cyber Readiness Report highlights a concerning trend in ransomware attacks against well-known companies, including Marks and Spencer, the Co-op, and Jaguar Land Rover.

The latter recently received a £1.5bn government loan guarantee aimed at protecting its supply chain, which includes numerous small firms.

Banner

Many victims of cyber attacks are small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which often require assistance to recover. Hiscox reported that while 27% of the surveyed 5,750 SMEs faced ransomware attacks, only 60% that paid the ransom managed to recover their data.

Impact on Firms

The broader findings revealed that nearly 60% experienced some form of cyber attack, with numerous businesses attributing their vulnerabilities to artificial intelligence.

Companies face not only financial repercussions, including fines and lost revenue, but also damage to their reputations. Eddie Lamb of Hiscox warned against underestimating the severe consequences of cyber attacks on all business sizes.

Jaguar Land Rover was reportedly finalising cyber insurance when it was attacked, incurring significant losses. Industry experts note that the rising costs of comprehensive cyber insurance policies may leave many firms unprotected. The cyber insurance market is growing, responding to the high-profile impacts experienced by businesses like M&S, which anticipates recovering losses through insurance after its own ransomware incident.


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Tech

OpenAI to launch TikTok-like AI video app Sora

OpenAI to launch Sora, an AI-driven social app with TikTok-like features amid TikTok’s regulatory uncertainties

Published

on

OpenAI to launch Sora, an AI-driven social app with TikTok-like features amid TikTok’s regulatory uncertainties

video
play-sharp-fill
In Short:
– OpenAI is launching Sora 2, a social media app with AI-generated videos, competing with TikTok.
– The app features a unique identity verification system and provides short video content without uploads.
OpenAI is set to unveil Sora 2, a new social media app that imitates TikTok by offering AI-generated video content. The strategy positions OpenAI to directly challenge established platforms in the AI video market.The platform has begun internal testing. Employees have reacted positively, raising productivity concerns among managers. Sora 2 features swipe-to-scroll navigation and offers personalized video recommendations.

Banner

A unique identity verification system allows users to authenticate their likeness for use in AI-generated videos. Users will be notified when their likeness is used in videos, regardless of whether these are published. Video lengths are capped at 10 seconds, with no capability to upload personal content.

The app includes typical social media features like likes and comments, with a user interface that resembles TikTok’s “For You” page.

Strategic Launch

OpenAI’s timing for this launch is strategic, coinciding with uncertainties surrounding TikTok’s U.S. operations. Recent deals aim to transfer majority control of TikTok’s American business to U.S. investors while permitting ByteDance a minority stake.

OpenAI perceives the current turbulence as a unique opportunity to introduce a competitive platform for short-form videos, appealing to users seeking alternatives during this period of regulatory scrutiny.


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Trending Now