Seems like a case of a Industry lobby group getting out ahead of the government to try to push an agenda to me.
Logged in users are worth more than logged out users as far as digital profiling and advertising so let’s conceal the juicy stuff behind a log in. Doing it this way makes the government the scapegoat. So I would guess 100% compliance isn’t anything too concerning, they just want to juice their numbers to make line go up.
If Google & Microsoft have to degrade our privacy and freedoms to raise their Oceania region profitability by 0.00000001% that’s a price they are happy for us to pay.
whybird@aus.social 2 weeks ago
@brisk I thought the same, though also I presume you’d have to be logged in to turn safe search off.
brisk@aussie.zone 2 weeks ago
I don’t see anything in the document suggesting that, although there’s also nothing stopping companies from doing that.
whybird@aus.social 2 weeks ago
@brisk The article says “However, the code does preempt concerns that children might get around controls by simply not logging in to their accounts.”
brisk@aussie.zone 2 weeks ago
The accrual document is linked in the first paragraph. These are the only sections I can find that seem to care about account holding
Image
Image