undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbee_rider3d ago0 comments

That is the wording of the California law, IIRC. The age brackets are under 13, 13-16, 16-18, and over 18. It also requires the OS to provide only the minimum information necessary to comply with the law, and only when necessary to comply with the law.

0 comments

themafia3d ago

What can I show to 16-18 year olds that I can't show to 13-16 year olds?

The real meat of the law is requiring websites and applications to comply with this signal. Which would be one good reason why there are so many categories of seeming little difference. This then gives them the opportunity to fine and harass developers out of business for the most minor of infractions or instances of mislabeling.

warkdarrior3d ago

Under CCPA, users over 16yo only need to be given an opt-out for data sharing, while users under 16yo have to provide affirmative opt-in.

hsbauauvhabzb3d ago

Which if you think about it, is completely bonkers. Recognising the harm that data tracking causes, but ignoring the harm for the majority of people.

bee_riderOP3d ago

I don’t really see the need for the line at 16, it seems like they ought to be able to push that line up or down and simplify the brackets.

But, the state doesn’t actually have an incentive to fine and harass their tax base out of business. I don’t think they made it over-complicated on purpose, I think lawmakers just over-estimate our capacity to understand laws.

kbelder3d ago

Keep in mind that as people age out of the 16-18 bracket, their age will be established fairly precisely. And that this information is spread by data brokers, and may follow them forever.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse