We've got the Online Safety Act in the UK, and now we're about to have new rules "to protect children online" - although it mostly affects social media. This is not the usual sort of news we would cover here on GamingOnLinux, but these type of laws tend to have a lot of knock-on effects.
So what exactly has been announced? Starting sometime next year, the UK will follow Australia to completely ban social media for under 16s. This includes the likes of Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat, Facebook and X (formerly Twitter). While WhatsApp and Signal appear to currently be exempt.
The UK gov said that high-risk features like livestreaming and "strangers being able to contact children" will also be restricted for under 16s on "other online services like gaming" which will require "stronger requirements for age checks on platforms". It will also hit AI chatbots, specifically those of a "romantic companion" which will be limited to 18+.
I would expect the likes of Reddit, Discord, Bluesky, Threads to also end up included.
In another government post they confirmed that while the law will affect communication features in games, it won't stop under 16s from playing online games.
When children reach 16 / 17 they will be able to access social media but "live streaming, and stranger communication including in gaming, will be switched off by default for these ages".
How will you prove your age across various platforms? Interestingly, the UK gov actually suggests simply using the account age is good enough (or has a linked credit card - like Steam, or an email address that's age verified) but the rules have not yet been formalised. They said Ofcom will "set out in the coming months different options for effective forms of age assurance for proving whether someone is over 16 that are accurate, robust, reliable, and fair".
What's the actual time-line here? They're not being exactly clear. They said the changes should be implemented "in Spring 2027" with the first set of regulations due to be laid before the end of the year.
The end result is that we are all going to have to verify our identities just to access more and more of the internet in the UK. We're past the point of a slippery slope; when it comes to privacy, we are staring down a massive cliff-edge. This is very much a Papers, Please situation for all UK adults.
Just think about how this will affect gaming - any game that has text or voice chat is then likely included (just like with the Online Safety Act - but now this too). It all depends on exactly how Ofcom will lay down the law.
The era of the open internet is over.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
About the author - Liam Squires-Hand
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly checked on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly. You can follow me personally on Mastodon [External Link].
See more from me
See more from me
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
You can also find comments for this article on social media: All posts need to follow our rules. Please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Readers can also email us for any issues or concerns.
35 comments
Quoting: UltraVioletjust like banning kids from smoking and alcohol this is a good thingIt isn't. The equivalent in this situation would be banning kids from being able to purchase phones and PCs. Giving the government the responsibility of managing a child's social media use will have overreaching effects way beyond their so-called "intent" of keeping children safe.
"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants" - Albert Camus
0 Likes
Quoting: mr-victoryMeta was supposedly laying groundwork for such changes years agoI'm not surprised. According to the Snowden revelations in 2013, whether wittingly or unwittingly, many big tech companies are basically an extension of the US intelligence community. Namely Facebook/Meta, Google, Yahoo, Amazon, and Microsoft. Twitter was surprisingly unmentioned in the Snowden documents, but right after the time when Elon Musk bought Twitter, Elon was able to produce evidence that revealed that Twitter cooperated with the FBI to censor Tweets that they just didn't like, in violation of the 1st amendment of the US Constitution. Censorship via corporate proxy. Long story short, fuck all of those companies.
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rshc1f/i_traced_2_billion_in_nonprofit_grants_and_45/
Fuck Reddit too btw. Reddit is not an honest platform.
0 Likes
Quoting: SalvatosFinally some good news. Hopefully they block them for 16 and up soon as well.
Quoting: UltraVioletjust like banning kids from smoking and alcohol this is a good thingAmen to both of that.
Quoting: SlaxerThat's not even remotely a fitting equivalent.Quoting: UltraVioletjust like banning kids from smoking and alcohol this is a good thingIt isn't. The equivalent in this situation would be banning kids from being able to purchase phones and PCs.
You are comparing apples to airplanes.
Smoking, alcohol and social media are all a huge negative impact especially on kids.
Phones and PCs are not, both can be quite beneficial if used correctly.
Phones and social media are often used somewhat interchangeably when talking about them, but the former can very well be used without the latter.
The idea that social media can have a positive impact on society has come and gone long ago.
All it did was ease the spreading of misinformation, echo chamber forming and unrecoverable societal division.
Instead of bemoaning the loss of Wild West social media, we should strive to get rid of them entirely, not only for kids.
Maybe it is not too late.
Quoting: SlaxerGiving the government the responsibility of managing a child's social media use will have overreaching effects way beyond their so-called "intent" of keeping children safe.Well, someone has to.
Parents clearly and obviously failed at the task. So beyond parents, who else is there? I can only think of government.
Quoting: Slaxer"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants" - Albert Camus“A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought.” - Dorothy Sayers
Last edited by TheSHEEEP on 16 Jun 2026 at 11:24 am UTC
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
The thing is, state-of-the-art surveillance is really expensive. Flying saucers don't just land themselves in Gloucestershire, you know. It's way cheaper to just make everyone doxx themselves with every online interaction. Just throw in some fluff about saving kittens or protecting children and you're golden.
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
Mohandevir 4 hours ago
Quoting: tfkOh, well. Time to teach our kids how to use Tails I guess...Time to bring back ICQ! 😆
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
Quoting: MohandevirOh-oh!Quoting: tfkOh, well. Time to teach our kids how to use Tails I guess...Time to bring back ICQ! 😆
1 Likes 😂 (1) See more...
I get the point of it being problematic that every adult now has to verify their identity. Then again banning minors from social media is not exactly the worst idea. Back when we grew up and the internet was young, it wasn't really that problematic.
Nowadays? Different story. The problem is that even most adults lack media competency. Throwing minors in there ... oh well. You can see what steam has become with all these weird "woke" cryers and so on. Somebody telling kids that this is "ruining gaming" will get them on board quick.
Honestly some kind of general internet license would even be better because even most adults are not fit to use it. Maybe require people to pass a test when making a contract with an ISP. The ISP requires your data anyways.
Nowadays? Different story. The problem is that even most adults lack media competency. Throwing minors in there ... oh well. You can see what steam has become with all these weird "woke" cryers and so on. Somebody telling kids that this is "ruining gaming" will get them on board quick.
Honestly some kind of general internet license would even be better because even most adults are not fit to use it. Maybe require people to pass a test when making a contract with an ISP. The ISP requires your data anyways.
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
Quoting: TheSHEEEPYou are comparing apples to airplanes.No, you are.
Minors are legally allowed to smoke and drink in my country (Canada), you're just not allowed to sell or procure for them the cigarettes or the alcohol. Maybe the Brits of Gamingonlinux can chime in on this, but from what I understand, teenage drinking isn't taboo over there like it is over here. Without looking it up, I'm also pretty sure the legal drinking age in the UK is 16.
Quoting: TheSHEEEPParents clearly and obviously failed at the task. So beyond parents, who else is there? I can only think of government.Heh, your name checks out. Don't worry about it, go back to sleep.
Quoting: TheSHEEEP“A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought.” - Dorothy SayersSo... don't quote anybody then, ever? What a shitty idea.
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
Mohandevir 2 hours ago
Thing is, most of these social medias are private interests, trying to control our toughts, conduct and habits with algorithms, however fits them and you call that freedom... For my part, I call that brainwashing and brainwashing was never done at such a scale and with such efficiency. This is what I find really upsetting, personnally.
3 Likes 👍 (3) See more...
Every database is hacked, every service abused. Now UK goverment builds a database for pedos to easily find kids by nicknames... Imagine how much $$$ would somone sell that kind of data. Pure Gold!
They don't understand that they can do more charm...
They don't understand that they can do more charm...
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
I am very conflicted on this. I am always the one to say these types of things will lead to more government surveillance and loss of freedom of choice etc. I have children that I did not permit to use social media until mid high school. I think they ended up mentally better off for it.
It is too bad US corporations were allowed to be left unchecked to create an addictive product and prey on our children and adults that do not understand how their addictive systems work.
Perhaps a social media education program would be more effective than age blocking. Maybe if parents, who never put their phones down themselves, understood how dangerous social media is for children’s mental health, would not be so quick to setup an account for a 7 year old.
It is too bad US corporations were allowed to be left unchecked to create an addictive product and prey on our children and adults that do not understand how their addictive systems work.
Perhaps a social media education program would be more effective than age blocking. Maybe if parents, who never put their phones down themselves, understood how dangerous social media is for children’s mental health, would not be so quick to setup an account for a 7 year old.
3 Likes 👍 (3) See more...
Quoting: SlaxerMaybe the Brits of Gamingonlinux can chime in on this, but from what I understand, teenage drinking isn't taboo over there like it is over here. Without looking it up, I'm also pretty sure the legal drinking age in the UK is 16.
Not exactly. The legal age to buy alcohol is 18, and you can be stopped (and potentially arrested, but who wants to do the paperwork?) if you're drinking in the street under 18. If you're 16 or 17 you can drink with a meal in licenced premises as long as an adult you're with buys it. If you're under 16 you can go in a pub with an adult, but not drink alcohol there. You can't give alcohol to a child under 5. Parents can give children older than that alcohol at home with meals or whatever. So, depending on how you define it, the legal drinking age is either 5 or 18, with a fuzzy bit in the middle.
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
Quoting: TightRopeI am very conflicted on this. I am always the one to say these types of things will lead to more government surveillance and loss of freedom of choice etc.If you understand that their true motivation has nothing to do with the welfare of children, why are you conflicted then? It's not like these bans have any chance at being effective at stopping kids anyway. Like you said, education on the dangers of social media would be more effective at getting people to voluntarily reduce or eliminate the time they spend on social media. If this really was about the children, the government could simply do a public fireside chat on YouTube to educate everyone on the negative effects that social media is having on the country. Let's not get away from the fact that these bans are just a trojan horse that governments are using to get their people to willingly accept their own oppression.
Here's a list of bills that the Canadian government has tabled the past several months:
Bill C-2 - Surveillance bill. Warrantless private digital info sharing.
Bill C-22 - Mandatory data retention. Companies must comply and include government backdoors on all electronic services.
Bill C-8 - Absolute control over networks and utilities, giving the government power to arbitrarily cut services from anybody that holds opinions that they don't approve of.
Bill C-9 - Speech and ideology. Intentionally vague "hate speech" definitions for silencing dissent.
Bill C-11 - Regulates online content, controlling what you're allowed to see online.
Bill C-34 - Sort of like the UK Online Safety Act. Canadians will be forced to use government-issued ID for accessing social media. Bans kids from social media.
Bill C-63 - Pre-crime restrictions on online speech and expression.
I know what their motivations are, and they're barreling towards. I'm sure that the other Five Eyes countries are headed down the same path, some farther down that path than others. I think the UK is a few steps ahead of Canada when it comes to tyrannical laws, but our government is trying to catch up.
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
As terrified as I am of it. I'm starting to root for the climate crisis to be the end of the human race. Hopefully in millions of years the planet will eventually recover and a new species can evolve to be as intelligent as us, but will hopefully make much better choices, maybe using whatever is left of us as a guide of what not to do.
Last edited by Eocene84 on 16 Jun 2026 at 2:48 pm UTC
Last edited by Eocene84 on 16 Jun 2026 at 2:48 pm UTC
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
1. Kids will get around this easily if motivated.
2. Politicians are totally clueless in all areas of technology.
3. However, this is being done as a precursor to try and control the internet and to ban dissenting speech of all ages.
4. The fact that authoritarian measures are being carried out in many countries concurrently is not a coincidence.
I'd agree with controlling social media for youngsters if it wasn't being done as an excuse rather than with genuine intent but I also don't believe the government should be removing responsibility from parents. Plus it's unenforceable without completely shutting down "unauthorised" internet access, including VPNs, which is the ultimate goal at this point.
2. Politicians are totally clueless in all areas of technology.
3. However, this is being done as a precursor to try and control the internet and to ban dissenting speech of all ages.
4. The fact that authoritarian measures are being carried out in many countries concurrently is not a coincidence.
I'd agree with controlling social media for youngsters if it wasn't being done as an excuse rather than with genuine intent but I also don't believe the government should be removing responsibility from parents. Plus it's unenforceable without completely shutting down "unauthorised" internet access, including VPNs, which is the ultimate goal at this point.
1 Likes 👍 (1) See more...
Patreon
PayPal