Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook Bans 20,000 Kids a Day

CmdrTaco posted more than 2 years ago | from the no-farmville-for-you dept.

Facebook 192

autospa writes "Although Facebook requires all users to be 13 or older, the social network bans 20,000 underage users a day, a spokeswoman said. 'There are people who lie. There are people who are under 13 [accessing Facebook],' Mozelle Thompson, Facebook's chief privacy adviser, told the The Telegraph."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

They end up somewhere else (4, Funny)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585002)

Myspace.

Mis-read headline (3, Funny)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585252)

I thought it said "Facebook bangs 20,000 kids a day", which is probably criminal.
But sending them to Myspace is almost certainly worse...

Re:Mis-read headline (3, Insightful)

isorox (205688) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585506)

I thought it said "Facebook bangs 20,000 kids a day", which is probably criminal.

Unless you're an Italian PM

Re:Mis-read headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585660)

In his case, it would be exaggeration.

Re:They end up somewhere else (4, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585362)

MySpace. The website for 14 year old girls. And the 40 year old men that love them.

Re:They end up somewhere else (1, Funny)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585498)

MySpace. The website for 14 year old girls. And the 40 year old men that love them.

I hope you mean their dads

Re:They end up somewhere else (4, Funny)

NevarMore (248971) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585738)

Only in the context of "Who's your daddy?"

Still facebook (3, Funny)

leaen (987954) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585006)

I though facebook is past time for teenagers already cause their mum and grandma are at facebook too.

Re:Still facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585066)

Introducing 12-year-olds to Facebook would dramatically improve the quality of discourse there.

Re:Still facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585074)

I though facebook is past time for teenagers already cause their mum and grandma are at facebook too.

That would be true, except that it's also forbidden. Makes all the difference

Re:Still facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585146)

A good example for the usefulness of punctuation. "teenagers already cause their mum and grandma" could be a continuous piece of a sentence.

"I thought facebook is past time for teenagers already, cause their mum and grandma are at facebook too." is much easier to skim over.

Re:Still facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585218)

I think you mean it's "a pastime" and "because" and "facebook, too." If you're going to correct someone, at least get it right yourself.

Idiot.

Re:Still facebook (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585312)

I think you mean it's "a pastime". . . .

No, I don't think he did.

Idiot.

Tch. Tch. Tch.

Re:Still facebook (1)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585378)

No, I think "past time" is right. As in it's time has passed. Not "pastime" as in "baseball is Americas pastime". I also don't think your last comma is right either. And it should be "on Facebook" not "at Facebook" and Facebook should be capitalized since it's a proper noun. So, to quote a wise man:

If you're going to correct someone, at least get it right yourself.

Those darned apostrophes (3, Funny)

Deep Esophagus (686515) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585732)

I almost hate to do this since you were so careful at catching all the other mistakes, but

As in it's time has passed.

should be

As in its time has passed.

"It's" is a contraction of "it is", as in "it's a shame people can no longer communicate effectively." "Its" is the possessive for "it", as in "its time has passed." So, to quote someone who quoted a wise man:

If you're going to correct someone, at least get it right yourself.

Re:Still facebook (2)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585512)

I think you mean it's "a pastime" and "because" and "facebook, too." If you're going to correct someone, at least get it right yourself. Idiot.

Maybe we need an over 13 rule on slashdot

What? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585012)

I am 12, what is this?

Lying about age? (1, Funny)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585014)

So subtracting 10 years off my birthdate is a Facebook offense?
Ooops.
:-|

Re:Lying about age? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585072)

Subtracting 10 years from your birthdate makes you older. Moron.

Re:Lying about age? (-1, Offtopic)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585168)

Subtracting 10 years from your birthdate makes you older. Moron.

Now here's a post deserving a -1 mod. There's no reason to be going-round insulting people/name calling as if you are one of those "under 13" facebook users.

Re:Lying about age? (-1, Offtopic)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585106)

Lying about age? (Score:-1)
by commodore64_love
ORIGINAL SCORE : -1
Moderation: overrated

How can a post that is ALREADY a -1 be "overrated"? The moderation system on slashdot is extremely broken. The post was meant to funny

Re:Lying about age? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585214)

You start at -1 because you're a fucking moron and a troll, and because you've recently taken to using dozens of sockpuppets in an attempt to make sure every single person here knows how fucking stupid you are. Something you apparently don't even try to hide anymore considering you posted this as cpu6502 and knew the intentions of a post by commodore64_love.

Re:Lying about age? (-1, Offtopic)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585320)

When a person is BEING ATTACKED WITH -1 MODERATIONS he has no choice but to quit his old account, because it becomes impossible to post. He becomes censored from slashdot due to the attack of the mods.

I would LOVE to continue using my C64_love account, but it is now impossible because of people like you ATTACKING me every single time I post.

The moderation system has become a tool of censorship. It is broken.

Re:Lying about age? (2, Insightful)

digitig (1056110) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585398)

If people with a vendetta against you mod you down it will be picked up by the metamoderation system. If you find that you are consistently modded down, bad luck, it means that your contributions really are crap.

Re:Lying about age? (-1, Troll)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585478)

>>>If people with a vendetta against you mod you down it will be picked up by the metamoderation system.

Hasn't worked so far.
Yesterday I responded to the Firefox 4 Release that the "download map" looked just fine in Seamonkey, Opera, FF4, and the older FF3.6. It was an Informative post (I thought), but eventually got modded down to (-1) Troll. These people have multiple accounts, and they use them to mod down every single one of my posts.

The mod system is being abused. I guess the only real solution is to abandon C64_love as hopelessly destroyed, and go off to create some random "userid168190" account so I can't be mod-stalked anymore.

Re:Lying about age? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585632)

This is why I post anonymously. I don't care if people mod me down because my posts are crap, but I'm sure there are many people who would dislike my opinions in general and mod me down no matter what I say. And considering I'm a religious communist who believes that everyone's work deserves fair compensation and who takes a reserved approach towards Microsoft and Apple, there are a lot of them!

(First off-topic post, and I didn't even get to complain about how I love the new Slashdot layout, but that there are problems where clicking things results in the wrong reaction!)

Re:Lying about age? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585720)

There's one problem about anonymous posting though. "Slow down cowboy!" You need to wait between your posts...

The wait time between anonymous posts currently exceeds 2 hours.
I understand 5, 10, 30 minutes... but over 2 hours?

Posting anon to be able to mod you up.

Re:Lying about age? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585834)

"Hasn't worked so far."

It is working. That's why you don't like it.

Re:Lying about age? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585488)

My UID is almost the same as yours, C64. I've read your posts here since I started visiting. Many people called you a troll, but I thought of you as more like someone who wasn't afraid to share opinions, even if the majority of those opinions are kind of retarded.

However, by using sock puppets you align yourself with dumbfucks like MichealKristopeit and sopssa, and even the few who might have supported you in the past (like me) have to admit that you really are just a troll.

Your name is dirt here for a good reason. Trying to avoid that karma by using sockpuppets only confirms your poor standing is justly given.

If you want a fresh start, use a new account with a new name and break all ties to your current UIDs.

Re:Lying about age? (2)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585500)

He's never attempted to hide it. I don't think he uses "Sock Puppets" in the tradition sense, I think he just likes having his name show up 15 different ways. It's very odd. We've gotten into a few arguments over the last few months and it's really odd to get continuous replies from 5 or 6 different accounts all of whom are obviously the same person.

They'll never get them all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585016)

I doubt they'll be able to stop everyone under the age of 13 from accessing it. Though it's likely something parents do not enforce or care about to stop their children from using it.

Re:They'll never get them all (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585056)

I always thought it would be funny for parents to create Facebook accounts for their kids when they're born, upload all their pics to it etc.. didn't realise you weren't even allowed an account if you're under 13. The chances that Facebook will still be no 1 when the kid hits 13 aren't astronomical of course..

Re:They'll never get them all (2)

xaxa (988988) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585468)

I always thought it would be funny for parents to create Facebook accounts for their kids when they're born, upload all their pics to it etc.

I have two under-13 "friends" on Facebook -- both children of people I know. One is only 1.5 years old, and got a Facebook account within a week of being born. When he's older I doubt he'll see that profile as "his", it's really his mum's second profile.

Re:They'll never get them all (1)

Jesterace (914041) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585776)

Actually that would be a pretty neat idea. Sort of an online style baby book. But who knows the future of facebook. Though the parent comment was mine and I forgot to log in.

getting non-poisonous fake weather/clouds is out? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585030)

just until it's (qatar) ours alone (patentdead/subscribible)? it (solar powered 'clouds') doesn't use any fuel/oil, so that's a strike against it right now? looks like a lot of stuff is out, including life itself, until we get a handle on the rapidly escalating holycost.

babys; being repeatedly censored banished by /. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585166)

feels ok/not good. definfinitively looks good on our math skills & surroundings resolution development (dna) scale. tough crowd, so we love you the most. thanks.

In other news? (5, Funny)

vawwyakr (1992390) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585046)

20k undercover police officer's fake accounts banded perday from facebook.

Re:In other news? (-1, Troll)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585246)

20k undercover police officer's fake accounts banded perday from facebook.

If this were true, Facebook could sue the government for the financial harm caused (excess labor costs).

Re:In other news? (2)

vawwyakr (1992390) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585272)

It's a joke on the whole "Internet where the man are men the women are men and the children are FBI agents"

Re:In other news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585380)

-1 "I don't like the poster" or -1 "I disagree with his opinion" are Not moderation options.

Completely off-topic, but it's cute how you continue to be oblivious to the true reasons you get downmodded. Since you can't see yourself for the troll that you are, it ensures that we will always be able to find a trollish post to downmod.

I don't understand (5, Insightful)

Dan East (318230) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585048)

When asked by the Australian parliamentary online safety committee how Facebook can detect those lying on age forms, Thompson replied, "It's not perfect." In fact, it's relatively easy. A standard online form asks a user if he or she is 13 or over, and the user can tell the truth or not. ComScore estimates about 3.6 million of kids under 12 use Facebook in the United States.

Uh, I don't understand this retarded article. How are they determining that users are under 13? The article says "In fact, it's relatively easy." but then goes on to talk about something entirely different. Of course the user can tell the truth or lie, but how is Facebook determining they lie? In their own words "It's not perfect" so what are they doing? Facial recognition to flag people that look young? Network of young friends? Use of improper grammar and slang in posts? I hate lame articles like this.

Re:I don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585092)

The article tells us very, very little.

As does this post, I know...

Re:I don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585104)

They probably say they're over 13, then enter their real birthday (including the year) later on, so they can get greetings off their friends.

Re:I don't understand (1)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585122)

"first grade was great today..."

Re:I don't understand (4, Funny)

snspdaarf (1314399) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585340)

"first grade was great today..."

In the town I live, that could be posted by half the population under 35

Re:I don't understand (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585522)

"First grade was great today" demonstrates spelling and grammatical abilities beyond that of 35 year old still in grade school, so it could only have been written by a real child.

Re:I don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585364)

Hey look at this guy, thinks he's hot shit just because he was able to pass first grade in under seven tries!

Re:I don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585180)

They estimate 3.6 million users under 12, but Facebook claims to ban more than 5 million a year?
Kids *are* getting stupider.

I wonder if they ban more bots, or Chinese "Like" farmers, than they do 12 year olds...

Re:I don't understand (2)

andrea.sartori (1603543) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585236)

They estimate 3.6 million users under 12, but Facebook claims to ban more than 5 million a year?

From TFS: "There are people who lie."

Re:I don't understand (1)

YodasEvilTwin (2014446) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585200)

It's done through people flagging their profiles, mostly. I've done it. Though they didn't take down the profile ... hmm.

I don't understand either (1)

hellfire (86129) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585298)

I hate lame articles like this.

Then why are you reading /. ?

Re:I don't understand (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585344)

I worked moderating dating/chat websites for a while, and we had to deal with quite a few underage users. There are a few methods for bringing the data to the moderators attention (Bayesian filtering, user reporting, even identifying likely cases by their friends within the site), but they come down to one factor:

People generally only bother to lie about their age in the age field. In their 'about me', in their username, in their pictures, in every single chat conversation or status update they'll be entirely honest under the assumption that the site only checks the Date Of Birth field. After a user/profile has been flagged as likely for whatever reason, it's generally a matter of seconds to verify whether or not that's the case.

Re:I don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585504)

From what I understand, they just ban any account that has any content with the word "Bieber" in it.

Re:I don't understand (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585580)

From what I understand, they just ban any account that has any content with the word "Bieber" in it.

Says 20,000 a day, not 20 million.

Re:I don't understand (1)

Magnus Pym (237274) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585538)

They are probably cross-referencing the info provided by the user against their databases. I'm sure the personal data available to facebook is comprehensive. For example:

New user lists his/her address, gender. John Smith, Male, 13, lives at 20 Silicon Valley way, CA.

Facebook accesses data bases that tell it that the inhabitants of 20 Silicon Valley way are Peter, Mary, Linda & John, ages 35, 32, 13 & 10, respectively.

Facebook figures out that the new user is actually only 10.

Re:I don't understand (1)

frozentier (1542099) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585628)

I know someone who has had a fb profile for 2 years, and it says right in the info "I'm a smart 8 year old". Page still exists and there's no way to report it.

Re:I don't understand (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585566)

All I know is that my stupid cousin encouraged both of her kids (8 and 10) to get Facebook accounts and brow beat several members of the family into friending them. Their accounts haven't been closed after nearly a year. I'm half-tempted to finally take the friend requests then immediately do the "Which Sexual Position are You?" quiz and post my results.

She said she was 18! (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585094)

I wish they would let us customize our default posting options, by age or individual. I would love nothing better than if my postings by default couldn't be seen by anyone under 18 (i.e., my nephews) and anyone over 60 (i.e., my parents).

Re:She said she was 18! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585128)

Yeah, but more interesting would be if they could fix me a pair of goggles one could use that only showed "beautiful women"* and blurred everyone else.
* for a given value of beautiful.

Re:She said she was 18! (2)

Frantix (1043000) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585290)

Default posting options are there... Create a list called "Restricted" and add people to it and then restrict their access in security to not see your wall. It takes 5 minutes to create and one second to add a new friend to it after it's set up. If you don't want to restrict every post, there's a 'lock' under each post that if you want to block the post to the "Restricted" list, you click it and customize and add the "Restricted" list to "Hide this from". Lists are your friend.

Re:She said she was 18! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585310)

They're all always "Yeah, I'm 18", until you stick it in their pooper and then it's "Oh, help, I'm only 13! I'm only 13!!!!"

Re:She said she was 18! (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585682)

Yes, we're all well aware of your position, Mr. Polanski.

Re:She said she was 18! (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585554)

She may have said she was 18, but the grey hair should have tipped you off she wasn't!

Re:She said she was 18! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585856)

She may have said she was 18, but the grey hair should have tipped you off she wasn't!

That's a stereotype! I've been going grey since I was 13.

Question (1)

Vitani (1219376) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585096)

I know a few children who have accounts on Facebook (children of my friends), how do I report them so I can finally be rid of their immature comments on their parents' publications?

Re:Question (2)

andrea.sartori (1603543) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585136)

Tell the police they are 60-years-olds posing as teenagers.

Re:Question (1)

Vitani (1219376) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585186)

Surely if they're teenagers, they're 13 or over and allowed to use Facebook? :o)

The kids in question are 8-10 years old, their parents really should know better ... (my nine-year-old son is not allowed on, much to his annoyment!)

Re:Question (1)

andrea.sartori (1603543) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585242)

Surely if they're teenagers, they're 13 or over and allowed to use Facebook? :o)

Oooops...

Re:Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585374)

And publish their badge numbers. Those police pretending to be little boys and girls are shameful. And boy, do they keep asking me for lollipops, money, and snuggly sleepovers. I keep asking them to bring their nightsticks and their handcuffs, I like to play with those.

Re:Question (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585196)

Um, tell their parents?

Re:Question (1)

Vitani (1219376) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585558)

Unfortunately their parents are in their friends list and/or set up their accounts for them!

Re:Question (1)

YodasEvilTwin (2014446) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585208)

Go to their profile, Report/Block link on the bottom-left.

Re:Question (1)

Vitani (1219376) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585544)

I looked that that, but the options are very limited (pretending to be someone else, abusive comments, etc.), and none of them are "under age user".

I could just block them I guess, but that doesn't really solve the real issue.

Re:Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585678)

Wait a minute. You don't like the kid's postings, and blocking them doesn't solve the real issue? What is your issue? That you can't be the kids' parent and make decisions for them?

If the issue is that YOU don't want to be bothered by their juvenile snivelings, then block them and move on with your life. There, no longer bothered, done!

Don't expect the world to change to suit you, when you have tools to block the bits of the world you don't like.

Re:Question (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585830)

I looked that that, but the options are very limited (pretending to be someone else

1) The kid is pretending to be someone else; someone whom is 13 or over.

2) Tell FB that you personally know that kid, that kid is 8, and someone else is impersonating the kid online (school bully, stereotypical middle aged creepy male lunatic right out of a TV special, who knows, even though its almost certainly the parents or a relative).

At the real world age of 3 months its pretty obvious the parents are doing it for the laughs, it MIGHT even be funny (but lets face it, probably not). At the age of 7 years its not so clear who is lying. At the age of 11 years its probably the kid lying.

Age of Consent? (1)

antivoid (751399) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585138)

Why are they banning under-13's from using the site? Is 13 the age of consent in the United States? what an arb number...

Re:Age of Consent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585206)

I would guess that it's the age at which they're considered capable of agreeing to the T&Cs.

Re:Age of Consent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585228)

Why are they banning under-13's from using the site? Is 13 the age of consent in the United States? what an arb number...

No, there is a Federal Law the forbids companies from collecting any information from anyone under 13. Why 13? I don't know. Age of majority in most states is 18, 19 in some.

Re:Age of Consent? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585230)

That's usually around the time they start sporting bewbs, and Z-berg isn't into flattys.

Re:Age of Consent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585234)

Probably COPPA.

Re:Age of Consent? (1)

pz (113803) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585238)

Why are they banning under-13's from using the site? Is 13 the age of consent in the United States? what an arb number...

Any number is going to be an arbitrary threshold; perhaps you didn't give the idea the few more seconds of thought it deserved before typing?

Re:Age of Consent? (5, Informative)

autocracy (192714) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585482)

Federal law prohibits websites from collecting personal information from anyone under the age of 13.

Re:Age of Consent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585698)

Federal law prohibits websites from collecting personal information from anyone under the age of 13

without parental consent. Fixed it for you. COPPA is the law which governs this, and as long as the website follows some procedures to get permission from the parent they can do so.

As a parent I wish more of the bigger websites would do so. Better yet, let me have some parental oversight over my kids online activities so I can train them how to be good and safe net citizens.

Re:Age of Consent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585540)

Is 13 the age of consent in the United States?

Only in Mississippi and for relatives.

Re:Age of Consent? (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585612)

Why are they banning under-13's from using the site? Is 13 the age of consent in the United States?

No, but it is the age of consent [wikimedia.org] in Spain and Iran. It's 12 or less in Angola, the Philippines, Yemen, and parts of Mexico. A few countries don't have an age of consent, requiring only that sex be within marriage (at any age). In most of the world, it varies from 14 to 16, and in the USA it varies from 16 to 18.

100$ per User (-1, Offtopic)

waban2011 (2024272) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585202)

its pretty unreal...this number is unbelivebel...you now that every user has the worth 100$ for facebbok?! expect sites like casino or travel have not that user-worth...Book of Ra online spielen [bookofra-o...pielen.net] and facebook a giants...unreal world *_*

Re:100$ per User (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585268)

What in the fucking hell does this stupid post mean? Can someone mod parent down?

Re:100$ per User (1)

andrea.sartori (1603543) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585368)

Parent's stupid post means "Today I have created sockpuppet accounts, here and on other sites, with the sole purpose of linking that website somewhere in order to boost 'sites linking to..' numbers on alexa.com".

gucci shoes (-1, Offtopic)

zlz1234 (2024274) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585254)

http://www.shoesstar.com/ [shoesstar.com]

Re:gucci shoes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585688)

the number of spam posts like this created by registered users has really grown over the last 6-9 months. Hell, I was still looking for the 2 millionth UID and we've already gone far past that. /. is growing up so fast! ^_^

Duh (1)

tekrat (242117) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585270)

My youngest niece and all her friends are on facebook and she's under 13 -- she uses her ipod touch to access the site. She can type with her thumbs faster than I can on a keyboard with all 10 fingers! Her spelling is terrible, but, she gets her messages across. I'd never heard of this rule until now, I just assumed it was normal for her to be on facebook.

What does Facebook expect? (1)

realsilly (186931) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585322)

Sadly, Facebook is the Crack cocaine of the internet. Facebook has put oodles of web games on their site that kids dig. Children are very social creatures, and this is basically the cookie jar that's within reach and a tiny bit of innovation (lying) from kids to get that cookie. The problem is that kids don't think through things, when they lie.

They may say they are 14, and then have open discussions about all the 3rd grade class stuff the kid does and posts from other friends to post dates and times and ages.

In some of these take-downs, the Parents are the ones who have consented to the page.

Whose law? (1)

moorhens (564268) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585354)

So far as I know, in the UK, there is nothing legal to prevent children of any age taking part in social media. (If I am wrong, please correct me). The European Data Protection Act is often quoted, but is not age specific, it just says that the expected target audience should understand what they are signing up to, and most agencies reckon that understanding comes at around the age of 12, which, coincidentally, is the same age at which they can be legally culpable of violent crimes. So if a bunch of savvy 11 year olds want to communicate among themselves via Facebook entirely within the UK, without asking for parental consent (or even with it) are they breaking anyone's laws? Just because Facebook tries to work within California's rules, does that mean that UK use by young children is a problem - not counting the whole appropriateness/stalker issue?

Re:Whose law? (1)

ted.hansson (877542) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585642)

As mentioned earlier, there are data collection laws in the US that has an age limit of 13. If they were to use a social networking site hosted in the UK, that would be fine, Facebook, however, is not.

In reality, more like 2,000... (1)

HikingStick (878216) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585370)

In reality, it's probably more like 2,000 kids who keep trying to get a profile that sticks...

"Come on...the tenth time's the charm!"

underage VAN (1)

SeakingFUKyea (1980200) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585434)

Lol if I had a nickel for everytime I posed as an OVERage person when I was underage..

Re:underage VAN (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585560)

Lol if I had a nickel for everytime I posed as an OVERage person when I was underage..

Unfortunately there was no world wide web when I was underage, and the only chance I have of pretending I'm old enough now is trying to sneak in to the pensioners' matinée film club

Re:underage VAN (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585870)

Was this before beer was invented? You have a 6 digit /. UID, I have a 5 digit /. UID and even we had friends with fake IDs.

wait what??? this is perfect!! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35585614)

someone made a facebook account on one of my emails, and i was pissed i could not have the thing deleted in any way..
i guess i'll activate it and start saying i'm 11 year old then.. :-)
FINALLY!

There are people who lie (1)

rust627 (1072296) | more than 2 years ago | (#35585756)

Really ????

What a surprise

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?