In Australia, where the world's first law banning the use of social media by people under the age of 16 was enacted , authorities have asked several companies to self-evaluate whether they fall under the category of banned platforms. Social media age restrictions | eSafety Commissioner https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/industry-regulation/social-media-age-restrictions Australia asks GitHub if it's a dangerous social network • The Register https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/25/australia_social_media_ban_github/ In November 2024, Australia passed a law banning the use of social media by anyone under the age of 16. Australia enacts world's first law banning the use of social media by people under the age of 16, targeting X, TikTok, Instagram, etc. but excluding YouTube - GIGAZINE Under the law, unless exempted under criteria set out by the Minister for Communications, platforms that meet the following three conditions will be required to take reasonable steps to prevent Australians under the age of 16 from creating or maintaining accounts from 10 December 2025: 1: The sole or essential purpose of the service is to enable online social interaction between two or more users. 2: The service allows users to interact with some or all of the other users. 3: The service allows users to post content on the service. Although no specific services were named, the Australian cybersecurity regulator, the eSafety Commission , which is responsible for the regulation, said the law is likely to apply to X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, and Snapcat. The eSafety Committee has requested that multiple platforms identify themselves as 'social networking sites that put children at risk.' The companies and organizations requested to be identified are:・Meta(Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp)・Snap (Snapchat)・TikTok・YouTube・X Roblox・Pinterest・Discord・Lego Play・Reddit・Kick・GitHub・HubApp・Match・Steam・Twitch The Register, a news site, pointed out that GitHub is not intended for social interaction, so it may not be subject to the law. However, it points out that it is possible to host content that is harmful or offensive to children, and that developers can comment on each other. It also points out that since the service can be used without logging in, it cannot keep minors away from harmful or offensive content.
That’s the only thing on the list that has reason to be restricted lol the rest should be parental discretion
Even so the police should detect crime and prove then punish.
Allowing lazy cops to do collective punishment without evidence is risky.
That said I’d happily ban all those webshites for all people, not just kids. But that’s probably why I’d never be granted a democratic mandate.
Police have no role to play in punishing anything