Do they have any rule that says you need a minimum number of users on a site to fall under the law?

If servers of someinstance.co.au fine if they move to hosting in Finland?

It just feels like a nightmare.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 39 points 9 months ago (14 children)

Apparently aussie.zone is asking users to DM evidence of being over 16, and the implication is that of those who don't - he'll ban/delete their accounts.

But absurdly enough, 4chan is exempt from this because all activity on there is anonymous. Not through accounts. So if the Fediverse had anonymous, non-account posting on-top of regular account-based posting then people could post anonymously happily, but anyone with an account would have to verify.

Make it make sense.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Oh, apparently their attempt at following the law is pretty ridiculous. https://aussie.zone/post/27246692

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    pretty ridiculous

    In the good way, yes. Who was it the admin of a Lemmy instance, I think, who said he would receive alcohol as a form of ID verification because to even acquire it legally in the first place you have to be of age, anyway? That's pretty much golden and incentivizes the local economy!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    But absurdly enough, 4chan is exempt from this because all activity on there is anonymous.

    Don't think that's it, it has no footprint in Australia. Meta, &Google, X etal all do, same as piefed.social, lemmy.world etal have no Australian base. aussie.socal users can just move to another server. I'm an Aussie.

    Similarly UK has tried to get 4chan, kiwifarms etc but they have no UK footprint so they just ignore them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Similarly UK has tried to get 4chan, kiwifarms etc but they have no UK footprint so they just ignore them.

    No, that's a matter of enforcement. UK is still trying to fine 4chan - but failing. Australia has just outright said the law doesn't apply to them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/oct/09/4chan-not-blocked-australia-under-16s-social-media-ban

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    I saw someone earlier say it was on the basis of anonymity…people don’t actually have ‘accounts’, so there’s nothing to verify. How accurate that is I don’t know and I’ve never used 4chan.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 2 points 9 months ago

    4chan is exempt from this because all activity on there is anonymous

    So, the politicians' concern is that kids will say dumb stuff on the internet, and it will haunt them for the rest of their life?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 9 months ago (14 children)

    To my fellow Aussies:

    The social media ban works through DNS, just change your DNS to either 8.8.8.8 or 1.1.1.1 in your router settings and browser setting. I've had no problems so far, but if that doesn't work you can always use TOR or another VPN service.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Quad9 is also a great provider for privacy: 9.9.9.9 ... In case you want to avoid google and cloudflare.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    wait, it actually works through dns?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago* (2 children)

    No, it's account based, in a lot of cases changing your DNS won't change the server you end up with at Youtubes or whoever

    Age-restricted platforms are expected to take reasonable steps to:

    • find existing accounts held by under-16s, and deactivate or remove those accounts

    • prevent under-16s from opening new accounts

    • prevent workarounds that may allow under-16s to bypass the restrictions

    • have processes to correct errors if someone is mistakenly missed by or included in the restrictions, so no one’s account is removed unfairly.


    Does every Australian now have to prove their age to use social media?

    For example, if someone has had an account since Facebook started in Australia in 2006, Meta could reasonably assume they are older than 16 so no further check is needed.

    https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/industry-regulation/social-media-age-restrictions/faqs

    Platforms then use a variety of signal's to detect if someone is under 16:

    DNS has nothing to do with it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 5 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    On reddthat, we got this notice in an announcement back in March 2025:

    Age Restriction

    Effective immediately everyone on Reddthat needs to be 18 years old and futher interaction on the platform confirms you are over the age of 18 and agree with these terms.

    If you are under the age of 18 you will need to delete your account under Settings

    This has also been outlined in our signup form that has been updated around the start of February.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    March? Over 18?

    Reddthat presumably was reacting to the Online Safety ACT UK there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    We discussed it in the community posts back in Dec 2024 when the law passed -- February is when the sign up change happened and March was when the announcement went up. The UK's bullshit may be what prompted the announcement happening then though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago* (2 children)

    Yeah, but what I mean is that wasn't a reaction to Australia here. Since your threshold here is 18, not 16.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    Doesn't there have to be a certain number of users for this to apply to them? I could have sworn I saw it had to be over 50,000.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›