· 139 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 10, 2026 at 4:28 PM

Europe should regulate Big Tech instead of banning kids from social media, Estonia says

Posted by Nepridiprav16

Europe should regulate Big Tech instead of banning kids from social media, Estonia says
POLITICO
Europe should regulate Big Tech instead of banning kids from social media, Estonia says
Banning kids from social media won’t work, as they “will find very quickly the ways to go around and to still use social media,” Estonian Education Minister Kristina Kallas said.
🚩 Report this post

139 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Lashiech Apr 10, 2026 +943
Big tech tend to ignore regulations and just opt to pay fines as a cost of doing business. I don't think it's a zero-sum solution of one or the other.
943
desba3347 Apr 10, 2026 +554
Then make the fines big enough that they can’t or won’t want to pay
554
Iwantedthatname Apr 10, 2026 +337
F*** fines. Arrest the CEO.
337
Alpacapalooza Apr 10, 2026 +195
It might sound like hyperbole to some but really, this. Car execs went to jail over Dieselgate and I'm pretty sure that had quite the impact. And it's not like we haven't seen willing whistleblowers in the social media space. Everyone knows they're predatory as f***.
195
I_call_Shennanigans_ Apr 10, 2026 +42
It should be a slam dunk to arrest both Mark and Elon. They are obviously criminals in all sorts of ways. 
42
HisaAnt Apr 11, 2026 +9
I think most of us are in agreement except for the few idiots who think non-violent crimes "aren't that bad" and "don't deserve jail time." Not all non-violent crimes are equal in severity. Big Tech/corporations that hold a big control over public infrastructure and culture should be held to a higher standard. Naturally, that means their CEOs should be arrested and jailed if they are pushing for policies that are directly harmful to society's culture (misinformation, radical propaganda, promoting civil unrest) or infrastructure (data centers ruining small towns, massive water consumption). Those should be considered crimes against humanity considering how massive the scale is. It's insane how many people defend these CEOs just because they're "non-violent". Like, if they aren't directly stabbing someone then it doesn't count. Even if they're indirectly ruining or causing the death of many lives. People like Elon and Mark should be jailed for life. Put them on the same level as mass murderers because they are.
9
Wondrous_Fairy Apr 11, 2026 +9
The US used to do that back in the 90s with entire companies having the CEO and everyone under them just sent off for 10-20 years if the corruption was big enough. Basically the corporate version of the classic Mortal Kombat spine pull. Then.. they just stopped doing that I guess.
9
TheSpecialApple Apr 10, 2026 +58
the problem beyond this however is enforcement, and ensuring whatever regulation isn’t lazily being worked around.
58
Hvarfa-Bragi Apr 10, 2026 +76
Show up to datacenters and boardrooms with SWAT. There are solutions.
76
Athinira Apr 11, 2026 +5
Boardrooms are located in the USA. Unless the EU plans to be invade, there won't be any "showing up". America isn't gonna do anything about it. Datacenters might be owned by someone else, and used by many companies at the same time. Are we gonna confiscate AWS hardware (owned by Amazon), because another tech company is being d_cks, and also simultaneously sabotage hundreds if not thousands, of EU businesses or public institutions, that rely on the same data centers? Short answer: No, we aren't.
5
Zncon Apr 10, 2026 +6
It's hard to do when the regulations happen slowly and are then fixed in time, and the companies have the ability to continuously change their process. It's the same way that so many questionable 'supplements' are sold in US gas stations. The law takes years to ban a specific chemical or process, so the company making it just tweaks things to avoid whatever the ban affects and they keep on going without a hitch. I have no inside knowledge but I'd be shocked if they didn't have multiple formulas tested and ready to release the moment something gets banned.
6
Zanadar Apr 10, 2026 +11
Do you really think governments don't want to? The reason the US only ever goes on about trade deficits in terms of goods is because they actually mostly export services. Trying to regulate Big Tech means directly clashing with their pet government, and before Trump effectively forced the issue, nobody wanted to pick that fight. Which is why we've had years of toothless fines and sternly worded letters.
11
joestaff Apr 10, 2026 +54
I hate when fines are just fees. Regulatory bodies need bigger fangs.
54
Nepridiprav16 Apr 10, 2026 +35
> Big tech tend to ignore regulations and just opt to pay fines as a cost of doing business. Regulation in this context means cracking down on addictive designs (infinite scroll, algorithm recommendations..) and targeted advertising. The point is to hit these tech companies where it hurts them the most, their business model (engagement) and fine them a large percentage of their global revenue if they refuse. Why should 450 million Europeans give up their privacy just because Big Tech is bad at following rules instead of regulating thenshit out of them?
35
isaacfisher Apr 10, 2026 +12
I rarely see "good regulation" in tech. It's always some lousy "click to acknowledge" something that people doesn't think twice when it stops them before moving into the site like T&C or accepting cookies. This only enrich some advisories and companies that help to "implement GDPR guidelines" and then some lawyers that are making good money from sending letters to small moms & pops stores with a simple website that doesn't comply with said regulation.
12
trgreg Apr 10, 2026 +7
just because we rarely see it doesn't mean it's not possible
7
Dvevrak Apr 10, 2026 +2
That is no longer realistic, most of content at the moment contains suggestive voice combined with just right amount of attention grabbing videos, the problem it creates is That it weakens attention span in individuals as they get used to shorter gratification cycles, I will not be surprised if gets cracked down even more, I do not really get your privacy statement, Social media is social media its public space, most people all ready gave big tech their names and what not willingly ? Or you mean the authentication process ? That one works like true false and the website you authenticate only gets of are underage or not.
2
Durzel Apr 10, 2026 +29
There’s also the fact that any punitive action against US tech companies would be met with the typical reaction from the White House. It’s funny how the calculus for tariffs and America’s supposed trade imbalance completely ignore US tech supremacy.
29
hackingdreams Apr 10, 2026 +6
Big Tech is literally pushing for banning kids online and age verification to *avoid* paying fines for laws like COPPA. Fines work.
6
Timeline_in_Distress Apr 10, 2026 +9
Agreed. Here in SF, we are well aware of how these companies flout the laws. I think these bans are a positive first step which may then provide the nutrients for lawmaker's spines to grow and act on regulatory proposals presented to them.
9
cedped Apr 10, 2026 +13
If companies have the rights of an individual, they also should face the punishment for an individual. Jail time should correspond to the entire revenue during the sentence and if a company gets the death sentence they get nationalized with the shareholders losing all their investment and the top executives jailed.
13
CombatRedRover Apr 10, 2026 +15
Pretty sure Citizens United is not binding on Estonia.
15
fiction8 Apr 10, 2026 +3
They don't.
3
grchelp2018 Apr 10, 2026 +2
Its not that straightforward because the shareholders aren't just some rich people but includes pension funds and what not. And a company going down also means a large amount of people now needing to find new jobs. I know one company that managed to get a judge to reduce fines on just that basis. Essentially said that they would declare bankruptcy and shut down the factory if the fine was not reduced and along with some union pressure, the fine amount was massively reduced.
2
Sea-Housing-3435 Apr 10, 2026 +4
Big tech wants simple age verifying regulations where they have to implement it. It helps them collect more data. Not regulating them but just making them verify user age is giving them what they want.
4
GetThatRobot Apr 10, 2026 +2
> ch tend to ignore regulations and just opt to pay fines as a cost of doing business. I don't think it's a zero-sum solution of one or the other. not in europe they havnt. The EU have forced a changes in tech company design and practices.
2
DKHTBH Apr 10, 2026 +347
Crazy that half of the comments on this are just "we shouldn't make laws because they will be ignored." Like these regulations would obviously be made with enforcement in mind. And if enforcement is lacking, that's not the fault of the law! Nevermind the fact that banning kids from social media is a trojan horse for ID verification and the end of anonymity.
347
__Yakovlev__ Apr 10, 2026 +93
It's scary to see how many people are actually starting to buy into this whole age verification thing. As if children are the only ones susceptible to misinformation and banning them from social media is going to do anything about that.
93
diener1 Apr 10, 2026 +23
It's not about misinformation but rather addiction and the terrible effects on mental health it has. Also, while I agree there are definitely some people pursuing it because they want an end to online anonymity, age verification definitely can be done in a privacy-friendly way.
23
DKHTBH Apr 10, 2026 +11
The addictive aspect of social media is the largely the fault of the personalized algorithms and recommendations, and infinite scrolling. If you make it so people have to actually seek out content then the internet would not be much more addictive than television.
11
BurrowBird Apr 10, 2026 +21
Propaganda mill has to propaganda mill. Effective means of regulations and enforcements was always, and will always be the true answer to fixing systemic problems, rather than pure vibes bs. But doing any of that interferes with the interests of sites like Listnook resting on their laurels like gigantic fatasses.
21
laluneodyssee Apr 10, 2026 +238
We should be doing both. Social media undoubtedly has harmful effects, but fining corporations just emboldens to keep doing what they’re doing.
238
Awkward-Customer Apr 10, 2026 +44
100%, like gambling, we ban kids from it and regulate it for adults. Advertising and social media algorithms should both be treated similar to gambling.
44
BrandNewDinosaur Apr 10, 2026 +5
Totally similar to gambling, intermittent reinforcement paradise up in here.
5
Spra991 Apr 10, 2026 +4
> social media algorithms should both be treated similar to gambling. That's completely missing the real issue, which is that Facebook, TikTok, Twitter and Co. have exclusive control over the algorithm in the first place. That is what you need to regulate, i.e. allow third party clients and make any kind of blocking of those illegal, so users can themselves decide how they want to view the messages.
4
Awkward-Customer Apr 10, 2026 +1
I'm not sure how I'm "completely missing the real issue". You're just proposing another alternative, which is fine, and actually the approach bluesky has taken.
1
Spra991 Apr 10, 2026 +3
The problem is that a tiny handful of mega cooperation have complete control over our communication infrastructure thanks to network effects. Everything bad follows from that. If we just add regulation on top, it not only doesn't fix the underlying issue, it makes it *even harder* for any alternatives to form. Your random Fediverse instance doesn't have the lawyers to deal with age verification and other regulation.
3
Nepridiprav16 Apr 10, 2026 +33
If children are legally not there, Big Tech companies have less incentive to build robust safety features for them since tech company can legally claim they have zero child users. Estonia wants the kids visible so that Big Tech is legally forced to protect them under the Digital Services Act, regulation forces them to constantly monitor and fix harmful algorithms. Not to mention all the risks that goes with mandatory age verification that risks destroying privacy regulations in EU (GDPR).
33
Timeline_in_Distress Apr 10, 2026 +13
That won’t work unless the penalties are severe. What penalty would be strong enough to curb their bad behavior at this point? They have already demonstrated that they do not operate from an ethical base. There is ample evidence which proves they are willingly trying to addict people to their products. They’ve been tasked with cleaning up their platforms and they have given us lip service and very little action. The tech industry is quite possibly one of the worst, in step with big tobacco and oil, so it’s time to treat them in the same manner.
13
Nepridiprav16 Apr 10, 2026 +9
We in EU already have the rules, we just need to enforce them: https://edaa.eu/digital-services-act/enforcement-and-penalties/?hl=en-US#:~:text=Penalties%20for%20Non%2DCompliance%20with,The%20intention%20is%20clear. > Fines can reach up to 6% of the provider’s global annual turnover for failure to comply with DSA obligations. Global turnover, not just EU revenue. The intention is clear. > Periodic penalty payments of up to 5% of average daily worldwide turnover accrue for each day of delay in complying with DSC orders, interim measures, or binding commitments. Daily accumulation creates powerful incentives for swift remediation. > Market access restrictions and temporary suspension – This last-resort measure can be applied, following a strict approval procedure requested by the Commission, if the infringement persists and causes serious harm to users and entails criminal offences involving threat to persons’ life or safety. .. > The tech industry is quite possibly one of the worst, in step with big tobacco and oil, so it’s time to treat them in the same manner. The difference here is that you can't bypass age checks with tobacco or alcohol as you can with digital age verification systems, like kids using their parents ID's. So why ditch our privacy rights for something that will be bypassed and the tech companies will then just blame parents by saying: "Our terms said no kids, the parents failed to supervise them". So we're back to stage one where parents still have to supervise how their kids use social media regardless of the ban.
9
Taubenichts Apr 10, 2026 +3
> So we're back to stage one where parents still have to supervise how their kids use social media regardless of the ban. You mean actual parenting? Why should I take interest in what my kids does, nah.
3
Habadank Apr 10, 2026 +6
Mandatory age regulations and GDPR can be fully compliant. Look towards Denmark and the age regulation for buying alcohol online to find a reference.
6
exOldTrafford Apr 10, 2026 +4
>If children are legally not there, Big Tech companies have less incentive to build robust safety features for them since tech company can legally claim they have zero child users. You know laws can be written to close loopholes like this, right?
4
Prior_Coyote_4376 Apr 10, 2026 +2
The incentive Big Tech companies need to fear is a lot of people getting angry at them for being assholes and bringing down populist wrath onto them. Just throw a couple CEOs in jail now and then. We know they’re all in the Epstein Class and have broken the law millions of times. It’s just a matter of finding their crimes.
2
PlanktonInitial7945 Apr 10, 2026 +8
What populist wrath? Many people didn't even leave Twitter, and it's run by a literal Nazi.
8
Atopos2025 Apr 10, 2026 +29
That's the thing about it though. Big Tech is buying politicians to avoid being held accountable. It's much cheaper for them to force states and countries to either come up with age verification or to ban kids than it is to suffer fines, because they aren't interested in helping solve the problem. They don't care. They just care about profits.
29
__Yakovlev__ Apr 10, 2026 +11
Having everyone provide even more data about themselves online also makes them even more powerful.
11
Corodix Apr 10, 2026 +48
Spot on. Kids will find ways around such bans, but they can't find ways around regulated social media platforms unless they avoid social media entirely.
48
BradPittbodydouble Apr 10, 2026 +14
Companies sure do find ways around ignoring regulations though.
14
LordOfTrubbish Apr 10, 2026 +7
>The way to approach this, to me, is not to make kids responsible for that harm [stemming from social media platforms] and start self-regulating," said Kallas, speaking at POLITICO's [European Pulse Forum in Barcelona](https://www.politico.eu/article/european-pulse-forum-2026-live-updates/). The "responsibility is on the governments and on the corporation side," she said. What? People want kids off social media because it's been shown to harm their development and mental health. It's not supposed to be some *punishment* to "hold them responsible" for anything.
7
Agitated_Web4034 Apr 10, 2026 +20
Fine big tech if they don't comply and in the billions not the millions and if they refuse to comply they don't do business in Europe
20
__Yakovlev__ Apr 10, 2026 +16
Thats how it should be. Kick meta and xitter out of Europe and replace it with a European alternative that cant easily avoid responsibility for its actions.
16
Agitated_Web4034 Apr 10, 2026 +10
Absolutely they've been more trouble than they're worth, an EU alternative that answers to the people
10
Return_of_the_funk Apr 10, 2026 +16
Maybe parents should just be accountable for their children.
16
0bsidian Apr 10, 2026 +13
We already lost the battle for net neutrality in favour of business interests. This isn't about protecting children at all, but about forcing personal identification on the internet. Your anonymity on the internet is over.
13
Ben-D-Beast Apr 10, 2026 +5
True but regulating these sorts of things is easier said than done
5
frozenpissglove Apr 10, 2026 +10
And when they make mistakes you fine them to the tune of billions of dollars at a time. That’s the only way they’ll learn.
10
Good_Restaurant15 Apr 10, 2026 +3
By banning kids from social media they absolve themselves of any responsibility, and shift it to the parents who are now "letting" their kids go online "illegally". Fascists 'gon fascism.
3
Ghost_Star326 Apr 10, 2026 +3
Omg this. The problem isn't with kids. It's with irresponsible parents not taking basic action to educate their children and the fact that companies like YouTube and Meta are just fine with letting NSFW ads run rampant on their platforms.
3
Drahngis Apr 11, 2026 +4
How about BOTH..
4
therealowlman Apr 10, 2026 +6
I mean she’s right. Regulators need to be way harder on tech platforms, the problem is the politicians are idiots and don’t understand how to apply the scalpel.
6
Kyrie_Blue Apr 10, 2026 +3
Restrict corporations, not citizens
3
5pin05auru5 Apr 10, 2026 +5
BLOODY ESTONIA WITH ITS PRAGMATISM AND REASONABLE SUGGESTIONS!?!
5
ConnectedMistake Apr 10, 2026 +13
How about both?
13
EmbarrassedHelp Apr 10, 2026 +18
The problem is that a ban involves mandatory age verification and age assurance. There is no such thing as private or anonymous age verification. Experts have repeatedly said that age verification and age assurance represent unacceptable risks: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/dangerous-socially-unacceptable-experts-warn-153314818.html
18
archaon_archi Apr 10, 2026 +2
I agree.
2
BillNyeIsCoolio Apr 10, 2026 +2
This is the real answer.
2
P0pu1arBr0ws3r Apr 10, 2026 +2
Get ready for lobbyists persuading Estonia of the opposite!
2
coolcoolcool485 Apr 10, 2026 +2
They are trying too but they're gonna have to get more strict about it.
2
Unconventional01 Apr 10, 2026 +2
Both should happen and the CEO should pay personally along with prison time. With great power comes great responsibility.
2
TheRedditHasYou Apr 10, 2026 +2
Or we could do both. Social media is brain rot for the developing mind especially, but every other mind too
2
PowerRaptor Apr 10, 2026 +2
Hard disagree. This regulation always turns into surveillance. It's always pushed for other reasons than actually protecting children, and backed by surveillance industries.
2
bob_chillon Apr 11, 2026 +2
Hello. How is the government regulating what big tech does, turn into surveillance?
2
Hopeful-Suggestion-1 Apr 11, 2026 +2
Yeah i agree
2
stonyb2 Apr 11, 2026 +2
Parents should regulate their kids!
2
yaosio Apr 11, 2026 +2
The purpose of banning kids is so everybody has to identify themselves online.
2
AkaiAshu Apr 11, 2026 +2
Making Big tech collect age data is literally what they want. Dont do that.
2
Paradox711 Apr 11, 2026 +2
Both? Both is good.
2
Master3530 Apr 11, 2026 +2
How about parents regulate their kids and you leave the internet alone
2
Talrynn_Sorrowyn Apr 11, 2026 +2
I'd sooner just see social media companues like Meta & X/Twitter close down than hand of my government ID to 3rd party comoanies with cardboard security setups.
2
xblackdemonx Apr 10, 2026 +5
I couldn't agree more with the article title. 
5
Cody667 Apr 10, 2026 +3
They can both be good ideas, but we can also acknowledge that regulating Big Tech is the far better and more positively impactful of the two ideas, even if not mutually exclusive.
3
Combat_Orca Apr 10, 2026 +6
Banning social media is a bad idea, all it leads to is adults handing their ids to tech companies and kids finding ways round it
6
jmurgen4143 Apr 10, 2026 +3
Finally someone is making sense.
3
OvercuriousNeophyte Apr 10, 2026 +3
She’s wrong. Europe should be doing both.
3
chemistryplayer Apr 10, 2026 +2
How about they do both?
2
Combat_Orca Apr 10, 2026 +5
A country that actually has a brain on this nonsense.
5
Philo_Publius1776 Apr 10, 2026 +4
Estonia is correct.
4
grandekravazza Apr 10, 2026 +10
Why? You should do both.
10
blind616 Apr 10, 2026 +6
My issue with "both" is that you need to check every user to ensure they're not children, while children find ways around it (for example a VPN to outside of Europe, which is even more dangerous because data protection laws aren't as strong). This causes potential data leaks as well, as we've seen with the multiple personal data leaks from last year. Discord leaked IDs of 70 000 users in Oct 2025. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jmzd972leo IDMerit leaked over a billion IDs last month: https://www.foxnews.com/tech/1-billion-identity-records-exposed-id-verification-data-leak Keep in mind these are IDs, leaked in the internet for many scammers to use. My country has had huge national targeted scams since 2020, when a company leaked information such as age, gender and mobile phone numbers.
6
Philo_Publius1776 Apr 10, 2026 +1
I've yet to see a good justification for banning children from social media as an essential decision in itself. There are problems with social media at present that make it such that you wouldn't want children on it; but is that because the social media is essentially negative for children, or is it because of those circumstances which are inherently separate from social media? That's what I'm not sold on. And the people pushing these bans are intentionally conflating the two in what is an obviously dishonest way, which makes me even more skeptical. You could be right. I just don't see the evidence to lead me to conclude you're right.
1
Puzzleheaded-Tap9977 Apr 10, 2026 +2
"Social" media doesn't excist. Its a business model that gets you addicted, takes your data and then bombardes you with ads to make you buy stuff you don't want if you're not on social media. So what's there to regulate? How much you can rig the underdeveloped brains of our youths for financial gain?  
2
ghost_n_the_shell Apr 10, 2026 +3
This. As well as solidify citizen privacy rights. Although we all know they don’t want to do that either. Well, at least here in Canada. Europe may be better off on that front.
3
Familiar-Weather5196 Apr 10, 2026 +2
> Europe may be better off on that front No, no we're not unfortunately
2
Heavyweighsthecrown Apr 10, 2026 +3
Why not both, both is good.
3
Kewkky Apr 10, 2026 +2
No, Estonia. Ban social media, don't continue trying to regulate them. All they do is pay a fine and they STILL come out on top with higher earnings.
2
Island_Monkey86 Apr 10, 2026 +2
All the BS found on social media is toxic for impressionable young minds. That's not even taking in to account the risk of propaganda. If there was a way to regulate this, I'd very much agree with not banning it. 
2
__Yakovlev__ Apr 10, 2026 +3
I hate this line of thinking so much.  No, all that toxicity is not harmful to "kids". It's harmful to everyone, whether you're young or old. "Will somebody think about the children" is just an excuse for big tech to start asking even more people to provide even more info about themselves online. And people are actually dumb enough to cheer it on.
3
Toruviel_ Apr 10, 2026 +2
Finnaly a reasonable take on this. People always want east solutions first.
2
Sunsetmargaritas Apr 11, 2026 +2
No reason you can't do both.
2
takeda64 Apr 10, 2026 +2
You know what would help greatly? Legalize jail breaking of the technology (phones, cars, you name it). Make it legal to produce tooling to allow it. US used tariffs to prevent other western countries from enacting such laws, but since it did it anyway, what's there to lose? The first country that would do it would shift the power balance and establish themselves as a leader. This was suggested by Cory Doctorow and it's genius. It shifts power balance back to consumer away from the corporations, and actually it would benefit ordinary Americans as well. https://youtu.be/P1EKQidRooc?t=3685 (the actual idea is at 1 hour and 4 minutes in)
2
Wide-Equivalent6863 Apr 10, 2026 +2
We should all give this a watch, Cory is awesome and smart. Also also this: https://keepandroidopen.org/ Alternatives to Android like Ubuntu touch exist, which was given by Canonical to UBports - so it doesn't want your data, although help with porting/creating apps and porting it to more devices would be great, would be so great to see it become a viable alternative to Android or iOS (there's others to like Mobian, GrapheneOS, Sailfish and LineageOS - that last one is most similar to Android and runs well on a Raspberry pi even)
2
nathingz Apr 10, 2026 +1
Both. 
1
FingalForever Apr 10, 2026 +1
The sooner social media is banned for under 18s, the better. Greece is the latest country looking at such (albeit for under 15).
1
Shliopanec Apr 10, 2026 +1
b..b.but we need less regulations to have european tech giants how can we survive without our own centi-billionaires??!
1
Mrs_SmithG2W Apr 10, 2026 +1
Do both until we get our acts together.
1
m__s Apr 10, 2026 +1
Why not both? Social media for kids it's like cancer.
1
Relnor Apr 10, 2026 +4
Banning children from social media is a proxy for surveilling YOU since you'd have to verify your age somehow. Politicians don't actually care about kids, they're in the pockets of Big Tech and Big Tech wants your data. The only way politicians care about kids is the really bad ways you don't want them to.
4
JealousChip8469 Apr 10, 2026 +1
what about both
1
AnomalyNexus Apr 10, 2026 +1
Kinda wild how Estonia seems to always be on the ball. Both online impression and visiting in person they're just consistently sane.
1
eternalityLP Apr 10, 2026 +1
The issue with regulations is: a) They are hard to enforce against companies outside the EU b) The investigations, court cases and appeals take years, meanwhile the damage continues. So, while in ideal case regulation is better than ban, it may not be true in real world.
1
ant682 Apr 10, 2026 +1
GDPR is already the answer - it comes with rules that if followed would block the harms spreading to vulnerable and also remove plausible deniability as more informed people will see the content and report it
1
Mr_Stealy_ Apr 10, 2026 +1
We either win the fight against big tech now or forever bend to their will. 
1
Basicyeti837 Apr 10, 2026 +1
Europe is on the right track. Regulating and controlling big tech is great in theory, but it hasn’t worked thus far and Europe did the next best thing to start seeing actual results.
1
Squornhellish Apr 10, 2026 +1
Nobody is banning Big (US) Tech - yet. But I feel that regulators are toothless, their regulations don't bite enough. The fines should be drastically raised and pauses of maybe a month or so for certain services considered if they don't comply with the laws.
1
Mascant Apr 10, 2026 +1
The one thing Europe excelles at. Regulating all the shit.
1
FixedFun1 Apr 10, 2026 +1
Estonia is my new favorite country.
1
TuckerCarlsonsOhface Apr 10, 2026 +1
Alternatively parents should do their damn job, instead of expecting everyone else to do it for them. In case anybody is confused, the actual goal is to control everyone, not protect kids.
1
font9a Apr 10, 2026 +1
Seriously. Governments are attacking these problems from the wrong end.
1
qnssekr Apr 10, 2026 +1
How will European officials get money from big tech if this happens?
1
hackingdreams Apr 10, 2026 +1
The sanest voice in the room and it's *Estonia*.
1
Lower_Ad_1317 Apr 10, 2026 +1
Ban it all. Let’s get back to people having to talk to each other face to face or on the telephone. Think of it as vintage!
1
chargoggagog Apr 10, 2026 +1
How about both!
1
Litty_Again Apr 10, 2026 +1
Agreed
1
Confident_Dragon Apr 10, 2026 +1
"It's just kids." "It's slippery slope to tell that someone will jump on the bandwagon and regulate everyone." And it's already happening.
1
AntiTrollSquad Apr 10, 2026 +1
The word is ban, not regulate. 
1
mariusherea Apr 10, 2026 +1
Europe should do both. Why do people think only one thing can be done by a government?
1
Maratron Apr 10, 2026 +1
Both is good. No one under the age of 15 needs social media.
1
megaplex66 Apr 10, 2026 +1
This!
1
CallMeCleverClogs Apr 10, 2026 +1
I mean, do both. Regulations with fines, and do not allow certain ages to partake period. Although neither of those are foolproof so do both.
1
Dracogame Apr 10, 2026 +1
Banning kids from social media IS regulation of big tech. Not nearly enough, and I get the sentiment, but still. Problem is just the enforcement method.
1
ElTejon_TheDestroyer Apr 10, 2026 +1
But then the tech companies just bribe that fat moron in the White House to penalise sovereign nations for trying to regulate them. It’s unfortunately fire to ban kids than make these idiot billionaires face responsibilities.
1
ProfessorPickaxe Apr 10, 2026 +1
You can do both
1
Expando3 Apr 10, 2026 +1
Europe wants the state to raise their kids? Nanny state
1
taotdev Apr 11, 2026 +1
How about both
1
pinkfootthegoose Apr 11, 2026 +1
banning kids from social media can be part of regulating big tech.
1
Sir-Knollte Apr 11, 2026 +1
this is so true we had p*** violence, etc all the time, only when rage baiting algorithms where implemented by big tech, did the whole thing boil over.
1
serpiccio Apr 11, 2026 +1
see u dont get it: banning kids IS how u regulate it
1
UltimaTime Apr 11, 2026 +1
We really are building a society where double standard reign supreme? In one hand you have Epstein being protected by local police and military to smuggle girls **around the world for decades**, a pedo for US president and at the other end of the spectrum they forbid antique roman and greek sculpture pictures on Youtube because they have genitals... And quiet honestly it's pretty obvious that the same kind of individual with heavy complex and complete lack of control toward their sexuality, for whatever reason or personal background, are probably the same like minded individuals behind this double standard. Can't we put actual mental health checks on whatever regulate our society, instead of relying on who get the most billions, while the vast majority live paychecks after paychecks?
1
← Back to Board