"Social media is the pre-1964 cigarette," the author of the bill has said:
A new bill proposed by Texas Representative Jared Patterson is interested in restricting social media access to those under 18 years of age.
The bill, H.B. No. 896, proposes new verification requirements for Texan social media users interested in accessing various platforms. Patterson suggests that the social media platform must verify the age of the account holder, by the account holder submitting a photo of a driver's license along with a secondary photo to confirm their identity. The bill also demands that a social media platform must offer a workflow that can allow parents to file a request to remove the profile of their child from the platform. The deletion of a child's account must be done within 10 days of a parent filing a removal request.
The bill makes no express mention of any particular social media platforms this law would apply to, and Patterson's office did not immediately respond to Gizmodo's request for comment.
"I would be somewhat surprised if this bill, as written, advances," Scott Babwah Brennen told Gizmodo in an email. Babwah Brennen is the Head of Online Expression Policy at the University of North Carolina's Center on Technology Policy. "While I would anticipate pretty significant pushback from the tech community, the bill also doesn't define 'social media' nor does it offer any limitations on which apps or companies might be included, and so would likely apply very widely."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by EEMac on Monday December 12 2022, @03:31PM (2 children)
Keeping tech-savvy teens away from something on the internet? Your success rate on that will be . . . low.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 12 2022, @05:31PM
It would be fine with me, if only the tech savvy ones were the ones that had access. Any barrier to entry will make the dumpster fire better.
Just a few of the top hits from DuckDuckGo:
https://www.stopbullying.gov/cyberbullying/social-media-apps-sites-commonly-used-children-teens [stopbullying.gov]
https://www.stopbullying.gov/blog/2013/04/09/reaching-teens-through-social-media [stopbullying.gov] (Kind of ironic.)
https://sociology.ucdavis.edu/research/research-spotlight/faculty-research-spotlight/robert-faris-teens-bullying-and-social-media [ucdavis.edu]
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/teen-suicide-social-media-bullying-mental-health-contributing-to-rise-in-deaths/ [cbsnews.com]
https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/09/27/a-majority-of-teens-have-experienced-some-form-of-cyberbullying/ [pewresearch.org]
https://journalistsresource.org/education/bullying-teen-suicide-social-media-research/ [journalistsresource.org]
http://sites.tamuc.edu/bullyingjournal/article/cyber-bullying-among-teens/ [tamuc.edu]
https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/parenting/social-media-has-made-bullying-even-worse-for-teenage-girls-expert-says/ar-AA146vHU [msn.com]
Suffice it to say, kiddo is not getting a Social Media account for a Very Long Time.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 13 2022, @07:06AM
Look at it from the perspective of blocking kids who are so naive/innocent/stupid/lazy that they wouldn't lie to a website about their age or birth year.
So to me such stuff isn't that useless.
And seriously, it isn't that difficult to block stuff on the internet if they are only using your services and you control the firewall and other aspects of their life. Just whitelist stuff they're allowed to access and punish accordingly.
Corporations successfully do stuff like that all the time - go try bypass their restrictions and surf porn at some of these corps. It's only countries that need to provide wider and greater access, which have more difficulty in blocking stuff.
And if they save up enough money to pay for their own device and internet access and successfully keep it secret from their parents, then great they've learnt some practical adult life skills.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 12 2022, @03:31PM (9 children)
Republicans are all for bashing Democrat-abuses against the constitution when it makes them look good, then they go and pull this shit.
Just burn the fucking state to the ground and let's all get on with our lives without government telling us all what's good for us.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday December 12 2022, @04:50PM
Can we at least put that plan on pause until we have machines that tell us what to do?
The server will be down for replacement of vacuum tubes, belts, worn parts and lubrication of gears and bearings.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 12 2022, @05:33PM
Just because you don't think Social Media sites shouldn't be "Rated R" per se or have any filter whatsoever. Doesn't mean, they shouldn't.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday December 12 2022, @05:40PM (5 children)
Given that at least one prominent Republican has, in their own words, called for the parts of the Constitution they don't like to be "terminated", and other prominent Republicans have repeatedly been unable to make anything resembling a suggestion that that might have not been OK, I'm not sure why you thought they were defenders of constitutional rights. Or you can look at their 50+ years of Republicans consistently escalating the "War on Drugs", which in private they admitted was to have a way to attack their political opposition by force, which has led to such behaviors as locking up thousands of people for (allegedly) having a vegetable, busting down people's doors at 3 AM, and occasionally shooting people in their own homes. And recently there's been a big push by Republicans to be able to police what you're doing with your own genitals or the genitals of another consenting adult. For freedom, y'know.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 12 2022, @06:02PM (4 children)
You're preaching to the choir.
Both parties love to use the Constitution when it makes them look good, but conveniently ignore it when it advances their goals. After all, no one is going to hang them in the town square them for violating their oath of office. "We've investigated ourselves and found out we did nothing wrong."
Fuck both parties. Burn the state to the ground.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Monday December 12 2022, @06:34PM
For copyright law and patents, I have advocated going all scorched earth, burn it all to the ground. It hasn't gotten a whole lot of traction. Anarchy isn't an easy sell. Need something that might genuinely be better.
What do you propose should replace our government of the people? Nothing? Turn back the clock to Old Stone Age times? Even then, we organized ourselves into tribes. And life was a whole lot worse. The rigors and dangers of living so "naturally", so to speak, ensured hardly anyone lived past the age of 40. And one of the biggest dangers was your fellow humans.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by cmdrklarg on Monday December 12 2022, @07:38PM (2 children)
*sigh* Not this bOtH pArTiEs ArE bAd nonsense.
Look, I get it. Democrats are pretty 'meh' at best, but they aren't the GOP MAGAt dumpster fire that is actively trying to destroy this country. The non-MAGAt GOPers are either going along with it, or at least not opposing it.
Be careful what you wish for, however; you may not like what pops up to replace it.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 13 2022, @08:44AM (1 child)
You really don't understand their view do you.
They saw a choice between HRC, who they saw as corrupt, and a total outsider who was pushing an upbeat, let's fix this shit, drain the swamp message.
So they elected Trump.
And what they saw was the Left go batshit insane and do everything they could to sabotage Trump. Total scorched earth policy. Regardless of the impact and whether what they were trying to burn down was a good idea or not.
You think they should see Trump as idiot and buffoon but you don't realize they thought his platform was a good one and the "Dems" were evil for opposing it at any cost.
So why don't they believe you about Trump? Because EVERY time they looked into a story about how horrible Trump was, it was overblown bullshit. Every time Trump tried to push a policy the MAGA's agreed with, it was total opposition at any cost by the Dems.
Go on, Trump's Twitter account has been re-instated, post a link to a racist or sexist tweet. It shouldn't be difficult, he tweeted a constant stream of them according to the Dems.
I said 6 years ago that Trump was better than Clinton because he wasn't a warmonger. I was right, but here we are, less than two years into Puppet Biden and the war pigs are making a mint selling arms to ship to Ukraine, and if that cools down then expect Syria, Iraq, and/or Iran to heat up.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Tuesday December 13 2022, @10:19PM
I understand their view all too well. What they don't understand is that when tRump was "pushing an upbeat, let's fix this shit, drain the swamp message" he was LYING. Not just your normal politician level lies either; virtually everything he did was the exact opposite of what he said. If they thought HRC was corrupt (they're not wrong BTW), they sure didn't figure out that their chosen messiah was that much worse.
Is it insanity to oppose and fight someone who is anathema to what you stand for? Or are they just supposed to give up and capitulate?
If sabotage and "scorched earth" were used it was because they learned those tactics from the GOP's actions in the previous 8 years under Obama. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Never mind the fact that the vast majority of the guy's ideas were completely unpalatable for the Left.
I don't think tRump is an idiot or a buffoon, nor do I want them to think that. He's an asshole narcissist conman. I want them to understand what he really is, emphasis on conman.
They don't believe us because their echo chamber paints us as people to not be trusted, and handwaves away any and all criticism about the Florida Orange Man. All one needed to do to hear a bunch of overblown bullshit was to listen to the conman talk; it was obvious to anyone who wasn't in the cult.
They trust a conman, which is never a good thing. MAGA policy is also not a good thing, and deserves to be totally opposed. They might like it, but I guarantee that everyone else doesn't.
Not all of his tweets were racist or sexist, but they were very frequently bullshit.
If you believe that tRump would not have started a war if it would have benefitted him you are sadly mistaken. The fact that he didn't start one is laudable, but claiming it because he is some kind of anti-war pacifist is not true.
Agreed, the MIC is making money hand over fist due to the invasion of Ukraine. Is that worse than Russia invading another country? Is it worse than letting Putin get away with it like he did in 2014? I don't like the fact that we are sending billions in military hardware over there either, but what's the alternative?
Let's be honest here: the blame for the war in Ukraine is squarely on Putin's shoulders. Blaming Biden for it is disingenuous as hell.
And besides: which is it? Biden being a "puppet" who is incompetent and senile? Or is he an evil mastermind? I hear he's both, somehow. Neat trick, that.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday December 12 2022, @09:56PM
Just burn the fucking state to the ground
Anyone who is for anarchy is an idiot, usually an idiot who would be king if it wasn't for that pesky civilization nonsense, Mr. Trump. Anarchy leads to monarchy, where the biggest monkey rules.
Have you read the Nooze [nooze.org]?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by anotherblackhat on Monday December 12 2022, @04:13PM (1 child)
The first amendment is a guiding principle, not an obstacle to overcome.
If your solution involves trampling it, maybe think about other ways to achieve your objective.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by mcgrew on Monday December 12 2022, @10:09PM
No, it is most certainly not a "guiding principle", the constitution is the basis and bedrock of all American law. The first amendment gurantees that THE GOVERNMENT can't silence you or put words in your mouth. It does not give the right for any twit to tweet, but it guarantees that Musk can rule his Twits any way he wishes. It's HIS web site.
But like any right, the 1st has limits. Your rights end where mine begin. You don't, for example, have the right to slander, as the InfoWarts monster and the pillow creep are finding out.
Nowhere, for example, does the second give five year olds the right to bear arms. Gun shops are heavily regulated, and nothing in the Constitution says you can't regulate age limits for speech or gun ownership.
Have you read the Nooze [nooze.org]?
(Score: 2) by WeekendMonkey on Monday December 12 2022, @04:18PM (14 children)
It is important to protect young minds from objectionable material. If they have unrestricted access to social media they might encounter liberal ideas, left-leaning politics or discover that there is a Democratic party.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday December 12 2022, @04:53PM (2 children)
That times 1024!
This is the concern. Especially in some states like Texas. The adults are concerned that the young people are already leaning more and more liberal. Realizing their freedoms can be taken away or restricted. The young 'uns will soon realize that they are old enough to vote. OMG!!!
Of course, taking away social media will simply reinforce the notion that freedoms can be taken away and have exactly the opposite of the desired effect.
The server will be down for replacement of vacuum tubes, belts, worn parts and lubrication of gears and bearings.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Monday December 12 2022, @06:38PM (1 child)
> old enough to vote.
I propose that there no longer be a voting age as we know it. I think children should be encouraged to participate. But, for those worried that this is a bad idea, we can simply not have their votes count. Count them up, report the totals, yes, but do not use their votes to determine outcomes.
I'm guessing the Republican Party would have conniptions over the very idea.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday December 13 2022, @02:49PM
I think the Republican party would love that idea. Everyone can vote. Their votes don't count because they are not of voting age. There is no voting age, so nobody can ever reach voting age. Count up the votes, but the votes do not determine the outcome. This sounds like a GOP wet dream.
Naturally the state legislature is old and wise enough to determine the correct outcome of every election at all levels. Thus freeing up the citizens from having to think.
The server will be down for replacement of vacuum tubes, belts, worn parts and lubrication of gears and bearings.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 12 2022, @05:35PM (10 children)
Or be bullied, easily, without end. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=teens+social+media+bullying&t=h_&ia=web [duckduckgo.com] Read and be informed. Kids can be mean.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday December 12 2022, @05:43PM (9 children)
Of course kids can be mean. They were mean before the Internet too. Ending social media access, even if you could do it, doesn't stop kids from being mean, it just changes how kids are mean.
Oh, and neither people being mean, nor the negative effects of people being mean, suddenly stop when you turn 18 years old.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 2, Touché) by Freeman on Monday December 12 2022, @05:48PM (8 children)
Generally you weren't bullied every waking moment, though. Whereas with Social Media and Smartphones. When the popular kid decides you are dumb and everyone should bully you. It could be happening in the privacy of your own home and the parents wouldn't necessarily know about it. Unless you have super good communication with your kid. Which let's face it, you won't necessarily have 100% of the time.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 12 2022, @06:08PM (7 children)
So be a parent. If *you* decide *you* want your kids off social media, don't buy them a phone, restrict their internet access, or whatever you feel you need to do to achieve your objectives.
What you shouldn't do is use the very blunt and murderous power of the state to force everyone else to have to do what you consider to be the "right way" to raise a child.
I unfortunately bought my 12-year-old a phone. In an instant he went from a fun, outdoor loving kid into a zombie. He no longer walks in the woods, no longer plays with his dog, no longer plays paintball with friends. He just sits in his room in front of his phone all hours of the day and night.
It was my biggest mistake as a parent.
Meanwhile a friend of mine said "no devices until you enter college". His daughter knows how to hunt, fish, can, garden, cook a spectacularly delicious meal, repair an engine, and can handle emergency medical situations (CPR, first aid, splinting, wound care, etc...). I personally think cell phones are the death of children and the reason my oldest kid is a lazy idiot.
But I would never dream of forcing my views on to you under the threat of government violence.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 12 2022, @06:34PM (3 children)
I mean, may as well say the same thing about most other things that we have regulated as well. We have lots of research showing that bullying is harmful, that "cyber bullying" is causing problems. That Social Media is a problem source for kids/teens. Just because it's not Alcohol/Tobacco, doesn't mean it can't be unhealthy. When something is as addictive as gambling, smoking, or Alcohol. It should at the bare minimum have a R-Rated kind of labeling, that requires a parent to rub a couple neurons together. Sure, there are "bad parents", but good parents can get caught as well, when they just don't know.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Monday December 12 2022, @06:57PM (2 children)
I think we need better training in how to deal with bullying. Some have proposed turning the 3 R's into the 4 R's, with the 4th being "'rogramming". Teach elementary school kids how to program. While I find the goal laudable, I am skeptical of a lot of the details. However, the whole idea is just another debate over which sciences should be in the curriculum. Such debates miss the mark on preparing students for the kind of insincerity, dishonesty, magical thinking, bull, and bullying that is so prevalent in the so-called Real World. I believe that education on such matters has been underappreciated.
Unreasonable homework assignments are rare. Unreasonable work assignments are far more common. Education inadvertently trains students to expect reasonableness in assignments. Then they arrive in the workplace, are given an impossible task that of course isn't obviously so, and they spend the rest of their brief tenure as an employee stressing out trying to do it so they aren't fired. They can't do it, and they are blamed and viciously denigrated and humiliated, and as part of their termination, perhaps treated to the demeaning escort off the company premises.
If students were better educated on this aspect of life, we wouldn't need bother considering such idiotic bills as this social media ban.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 12 2022, @08:50PM (1 child)
We have the training available. Teach your kid to walk up to the bully, and break his freaking nose. Don't say a word, just walk up, and POW! You really want him to break the nose - it hurts as badly as almost any kid has ever hurt, and it takes weeks to heal.
It works. Even if the nose isn't broken, a punch in the nose is going to hurt. And, the bully KNOWS that his victim can and will return if the bullying continues.
Corporal punishment works, despite all the wankery we get from effeminate self-appointed mental health experts.
We need less sensitivity training, and more assertiveness training for children. That goes for women and Democrats as well.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Freeman on Monday December 12 2022, @11:02PM
While that may be what I did, it's not exactly the best strategy. Teaching a child to lash out isn't healthy either. The bullies need help just as much as the bullied. Perhaps even more so as bullying is inherently antisocial. Sure, kids may bully one another at certain points. A bully, someone who repeatedly bullies other children and does so on a regular enough basis. Will have trouble later in life, when they learn that they can't bully everyone. Or when they learn they can get away with it, until they can't. Whether due to them being killed, put in jail, or whatever else bad that could happen later in life. It could just mean that they don't get promoted, get stuck in crap jobs, or people just don't want to be friends with them.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by gznork26 on Monday December 12 2022, @07:49PM
If *you* decide *you* want your kids off social media, don't buy them a phone, restrict their internet access, or whatever you feel you need to do to achieve your objectives.
=====
Funny that. If you squint, it's a good distillation of what's wrong with a whole raft of demands made of the government to restrict the actions or freedom of others. Say it's against your cult's precepts to [eat quail on Wednesday], but feel free to fill that bracket with something more divisive. You could simply refrain from that behavior yourself, as your cult's teachings dictate, and that would be the end of it. But it irks you to see or hear about other people doing it, even those not in your cult. So you work out the leverage to instigate the government to impose that rule on everyone. It's even imposed on people whose precepts demand that they always eat quail on Wednesday. And now we can magnify this dispute and call for everyone to take sides on the issue, because it represents boogymen in both camps.
The arguments that arise from this pattern are the kind in which you may be speaking (or yelling) about one thing, but the emotional fire it stokes drags in all sorts of past injustices, slights, qualms, and peeves, raising the temperature of the dispute.
So, what are the hidden topics that this attack on the use of social media by minors are really about?
Khipu were Turing complete.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday December 13 2022, @01:30AM
You say that as though he is still a zombie. You do realize that as a parent it is your responsibility to correct your mistakes, don't you?
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday December 13 2022, @03:16AM
You're the parent. Take the phone away from the kid.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 5, Informative) by MrGuy on Monday December 12 2022, @04:35PM (3 children)
...the trojan horse here is that this bill would also require social media companies to track the real name, address, etc., for every user of their platform. And, under the CFAA, any attempt to use a fake ID here would be a felony.
In addition to banning anonymity, it would also be a heck of a boon to advertisers to be able to conclusively tie your social media profile and activity to a firm identity. Not that they have much of a problem with that right now, but every little bit helps.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday December 12 2022, @04:56PM (1 child)
What if all Big Tech companies could get together and agree on a system where everyone could have ID chips implanted at birth in order to access social media? It wouldn't be the government doing it, so it's all okay! It is for the glorious profit of rich people.
The server will be down for replacement of vacuum tubes, belts, worn parts and lubrication of gears and bearings.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday December 12 2022, @05:32PM
Those ID chips would be so useful though! Implant them on everybody's right hand and maybe their forehead, and maybe we could also have them linked to your bank account so you could use them for commerce and such. And eventually, retailers won't accept those outdated things like debit cards and paper checks or (ugh) cash, because who would need them?
I read about this prospect in a book once. It was called "Revelations", and it seemed to be mostly about a really bad acid trip somebody had, but definitely had some good ideas about capitalism in it too, all propagated by some guy who had set himself up in a temple in Jerusalem and everyone was listening to for some reason.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 12 2022, @06:45PM
Right, because Facebook isn't already doing that. Oh, yeah, they are. https://www.supereasy.com/how-to-find-out-someones-real-name-on-facebook/ [supereasy.com]
Seems like TikTok does as well: https://techcrunch.com/2021/06/03/tiktok-just-gave-itself-permission-to-collect-biometric-data-on-u-s-users-including-faceprints-and-voiceprints/ [techcrunch.com]
Twitter seems not to, though: https://www.supereasy.com/find-out-someones-real-name-on-twitter/ [supereasy.com]
Instagram seems not to, either: https://www.supereasy.com/find-out-real-name-instagram/ [supereasy.com]
From a user privacy aspect, I can get the issue with requiring the use of "real names" on social media sites. Still, from a brain has light on aspect, it's not necessarily difficult to find out who someone is. We don't want government targeting individual companies, but we don't want stupid side effects either. Like requiring sites like SoylentNews to gather real names, etc.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Monday December 12 2022, @10:42PM
When my kids (both girls) were young, I used to roughhouse with them frequently. I'd put them in a situation where they'd be trapped, unable to move, they'd start screaming, and I'd tell them, "use leverage to get free!" It worked, they quickly learned the best moves to extricate themselves. It was also pre-training on how to defend yourself, since they also quickly learned not to get into a situation in the first place where there was a possibility of getting trapped.
They also had only 2 rules while growing up: 1) you can do anything you want; and 2) everything you do has consequences. Rule 2 doesn't need much explanation, and I'd tell them regarding rule 1, when their mother or I weren't around, what was to stop them from doing what they wanted to do?
As far as bullying goes, they were taught to stand up for themselves and each other. When 2 girls at the county fair decided to gang up on my oldest one year (high school age), I was standing close by talking to a buddy. I heard some commotion, looked over, saw my oldest was involved, and turned to my buddy and said, "Well, I guess I'd better go over there and see what's up." By the time I turned back my daughter had both of the girls on the ground eating dirt. She might be 5-foot-nothing and weigh 97 lbs soaking wet but no one ever messed w/ her after that.
My youngest has a varsity letter in 4 sports and was Salutatorian so pretty much all the other kids looked up to her and she never really had any problems. It seems as though only the weaker kids get picked on.
Teach them young how to defend and stand up for themselves and it decreases the odds other kids will want to mess w/ them. Unless they like eating dirt.
Side note: We were all at a party one time and another mother was going through the phone of her oldest. She found out he was failing one class and he had lied to her about his grades. She said something along the lines of, "He's dead meat." My daughters were horrified. Later, I reassured them that I would never invade their privacy by snooping on their phones, and referred them to rules 1 and 2. They got the message.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday December 13 2022, @02:42PM
I wonder if the bill would cover online classrooms as written.
According to legacy media, no barrier to purchasing guns and ammo is high enough, and no barrier to voting is low enough (which seems backwards) but this puts social media right up there with gun purchasing. Which is exactly what legacy media would like, so I expect STRONG corporate support from every locally owned and operated legacy media outlet.
Another novelty is I don't think they're going to require submission of birth certificates so deplatforming attacks should be fun as a "social engineering hack". "We have to SAVE THE CHILDREN", etc.
The irony is, according to Dead Internet Theory, most social media sites are mostly well funded bot farms, so kicking the last remaining humans off facebook and twitter will have weird results, social media will literally just be connecting bots to bots at that point.
As with most proposed bills, this is likely a "all PR is good PR" as I would assume 99% of SN had never heard of this dude before the news story. "Well, it was a dumb bill that would have never worked but he's trying to hard to save the children!"