Latest news with #LisaGiven
RNZ News
2 days ago
- RNZ News
Six months out from social media ban, age-checking tech mistakes kids for 37-year-olds
Face-scanning technology tests could only guess age within an 18-month range in 85 percent of cases. Photo: Supplied/ABC Children as young as 15 were repeatedly misidentified as being in their 20s and 30s during Government tests of age-checking tools, sowing new doubts over whether the teen social media ban is viable. ABC News can reveal that face-scanning technology tested on school students this year could only guess their age within an 18-month range in 85 percent of cases. "It's definitely a problem," said Andrew Hammond, general manager of software consultancy firm KJR, which was tasked with running the trial. "So far, it's not perfect and it's not getting every child, but does that mean it's no good at all?" The full results of the age assurance technology trial were not expected to be released until later this year, but preliminary data had experts worried. "I don't think the ban is viable," said RMIT University information services professor Lisa Given, who had closely analysed the Government's policy. "Parents are definitely headed for a rude shock, in terms of what this legislation will actually deliver to them." Under the social media ban, more than 20 million Australians will be required to demonstrate they are 16 or older to log in to most major social media platforms. The ban is due to take effect in December, but the Government has yet to decide how it will be implemented, amid ongoing questions over whether age-checking technology is up to the job. The Government's technology trial, which has been running for eight months, was meant to provide some answers, but Professor Given said the public may be disappointed. "The accuracy level at 85 [percent] is actually quite low and an 18-month range is significant, when you're trying to identify a very particular age grouping," she said. "We are going to see a messy situation emerging immediately, where people will have what they call false positives, false negatives." Some students at Canberra's John Paul College, who previewed the technology as part of the Government's trial, were surprised, when their results were up to decades off the mark. Sixteen-year-old Andy was misidentified as 19, 37, 26, and 23 years old by various face-scanning tools he used. "I don't think the technology is ready yet to become a full-fledged primary defence system," he said. "It's pretty inconsistent." Seventeen-year-old Beth was given results ranging from 14-32. "I usually get told by other people that I don't look 17, I look older, so when it says 14, I thought… that's interesting." Her results from the other end of the spectrum were unwelcome for different reasons. "It's a bit insulting, because that's how old my aunty is," she said. "I don't want to look 32 just yet." Seventeen-year-old Nomi was especially concerned, when one tool mistook her for a 13-year-old. "I'm almost 18," she said. "If I try to sign up to an app and it tells me 'you're not meeting an age requirement', even though I am, that would be a problem for me." While the face-scanning results from the trial may not seem promising, Hammond said he was confident the ban would still work, because it did not rely exclusively on that tech. "If the solution to implementing the legislation was just facial age estimation, I'd say, 'Yep, it's probably not good enough'," he said. "However, it's just one of the tools in the toolkit that could be used." Age-verification providers are not discouraged by the early results either, arguing that other tech was always going to be necessary as a complement to get precise results. "You would never rely on age estimation for people who are literally at the age of 16," said Iain Corby from the Age Verification Providers Association, the industry body for age-check companies. "It was never going to be good enough for that," he said. One tool mistook Beth, 17, as being 32 years old. Photo: ABC News Corby said the early data reported by ABC News, showing an accuracy rate within 18 months for only 85 percent of students, is roughly what he expected. "I think even the best-in-class achieves about a year and a month, on average, above or below your real age." Among the methods tested were other age-estimation techniques that rely on biological traits, such as voice and hand movements, to guess the age of a user, but those methods struggled with the same accuracy issues and fewer companies offered the service. Another avenue was guessing a person's age based on their online activity, but that was also imprecise. Other tools offer a higher degree of certainty by inferring or even verifying a user's age, using data provided by third parties, such as banks, schools or healthcare providers. The strongest proof is a overnment-issued ID, such as a passport or a driver's license, but the legislation prevented social media companies from insisting on it. A last-minute amendment to the Bill, when it was passed back in November, meant platforms would be forced to offer users alternative methods to prove their age. That rule meant many Australians who could not easily provide those more reliable proofs might be forced to rely on less accurate methods, such as face scanning, if they wanted to use social media. "We do know, generally, that young people are going to be less likely to have a Government-issued ID that would satisfy some form of age verification," Given said. If facial scanning was on offer, under-16s who wanted to dodge the ban might be tempted to choose it anyway, in the hope they could fool it. "They might put glasses on, they might put make-up on, different hairstyle, different lighting, just to see if the system is actually able to accurately see that they're underage or over 16," Given said. The Government was expected to decide how the ban would work in the coming months, but one possible solution for the shakiness of facial scanning was a cascade-style system, similar to what we've see in bottle shops. Users might use face-scanning tech as a first hurdle and only be asked for further proof, if their result was within a 5-10-year margin of 16. "If you're within that margin for error, then you have to go to a second stage and find some other way of confirming that somebody is over the legal age," Corby said. Even so, everyone agreed it would not be perfect. "I'm optimistic, having seen the results," Hammond said. "Not necessarily making sure every 16-year-old doesn't get access, but making sure that most 16-year-olds don't get access to social media. "There's a number of solutions… and they have a level of accuracy. Now, whether the accuracy is good enough is a different question." Professor Given saw the end of the tech trial as an opportunity to reconsider the ban. "A responsible decision from Government would be weighing up the evidence in front of them and deciding whether that's actually a robust approach," she said. In the meantime, public expectations of the policy remained undeterred. "I think it's a really positive move for our young people," said John Paul College principal Craig Wattam. "I think that limiting their exposure to places that are potentially really dangerous is a really liberating thing." On the question of the tech's accuracy, he was also optimistic. "I guess this is the whole purpose of a trial," he said. "I'm confident that by the time we get closer to December… they may well have figured out more accurate ways to verify students' ages." A spokesperson for Communications Minister Anika Wells told ABC News the Government would be guided by advice from the eSafety Commissioner on how best to implement the ban. "We know that social media age-restrictions will not be the end-all, be-all solution for harms experienced by young people online, but it's a step in the right direction to keep our kids safer," they said. - ABC
ABC News
2 days ago
- Politics
- ABC News
Six months out from teen social media ban, age-checking tech mistakes kids for 37-year-olds
Children as young as 15 were repeatedly misidentified as being in their 20s and 30s during government tests of age-checking tools, sowing new doubts about whether the teen social media ban is viable. ABC News can reveal that face-scanning technology tested on school students this year could only guess their age within an 18-month range in 85 per cent of cases. "It's definitely a problem," said Andrew Hammond, general manager of software consultancy firm KJR, which was tasked with running the trial. "So far, it's not perfect, and it's not getting every child. But does that mean that it's no good at all?" The full results of the age assurance technology trial are not expected to be released until later this year, but preliminary data has experts worried. "I don't think the ban is viable," said Lisa Given, professor of information sciences at RMIT University, who has closely analysed the government's policy. Under the social media ban, more than 20 million Australians will be required to demonstrate that they are 16 or older to log in to most major social media platforms. It is due to take effect in December, but the government is yet to decide how it will be implemented, amid ongoing questions as to whether age-checking technology is up to the job. The government's technology trial, which has been running for eight months, was meant to provide some answers, but Professor Given said the public may be disappointed. "The accuracy level at 85 is actually quite low, and an 18-month range is significant when you're trying to identify a very particular age grouping," she said. "We are going to see a messy situation emerging immediately where people will have what they call false positives, false negatives". Some of the students at Canberra's John Paul College, who previewed the technology as part of the government's trial, were surprised when their results were up to decades off the mark. Sixteen-year-old Andy was misidentified as 19, 37, 26, and 23 years old by various face scanning tools he used. "I don't think the technology is ready yet to become a full-fledged primary defence system … It's pretty inconsistent," he said. Seventeen-year-old Beth was given results ranging from 14 to 32. "I usually get told by other people that I don't look 17, I look older. And so when it says 14, I thought … that's interesting." Her results from the other end of the spectrum were unwelcome for different reasons. "It's a bit insulting because that's how old my aunty is … I don't want to look 32 just yet," she said. Seventeen-year-old Nomi was especially concerned when one tool mistook her for a 13-year-old. "I'm almost 18. If I try to sign up to an app and it tells me 'you're not meeting an age requirement' even though I am, that would be a problem for me," she said. While the face scanning results from the trial might not seem promising, Mr Hammond said he is confident the ban will still work because it does not rely exclusively on that tech. "If the solution to implementing the legislation was just facial age estimation, I'd say 'yep, it's probably not good enough'," he said. "However, it's just one of the tools in the toolkit that could be used." Age verification providers are not discouraged by the early results either, arguing that other tech was always going to be necessary as a complement to get precise results. "You would never rely on age estimation for people who are literally at the age of 16," said Iain Corby from the Age Verification Providers Association, the industry body for age-check companies. Mr Corby said the early data reported by ABC News (showing an accuracy rate within 18 months for only 85 per cent of students) is roughly what he expected. "I think even the best-in-class achieves about a year and a month, on average, above or below your real age." Among the methods tested were other age-estimation techniques that rely on biological traits such as voice and hand movements to guess the age of a user. But those methods struggle with the same accuracy issues, and fewer companies offer the service. Another avenue is guessing a person's age based on their online activity, but that is also imprecise. Other tools offer a higher degree of certainty by inferring or even verifying a user's age, using data provided by third parties such as banks, schools, or healthcare providers. The strongest proof is a government-issued ID, such as a passport or a driver's license, but the legislation prevents social media companies from insisting on it. A last-minute amendment to the bill, when it was passed back in November, means platforms will be forced to offer users alternative methods to prove their age. That rule means many Australians who cannot easily provide those more reliable proofs may be forced to rely on less accurate methods, such as face scanning, if they want to use social media. "We do know generally that young people are going to be less likely to have a government-issued ID that would satisfy some form of age verification," said Professor Given. If facial scanning is on offer, under-16s who want to dodge the ban might be tempted to choose it anyway, in the hope they can fool it. "They might put glasses on, they might put makeup on, different hairstyle, different lighting, just to see if the system is actually able to accurately see that they're underage or over 16," said Professor Given. The government is expected to decide how the ban will work in the coming months, but one possible solution for the shakiness of facial scanning is a cascade-style system, similar to what we see in bottle shops. Users might use face scanning tech as a first hurdle, and only be asked for further proof if their result is within a five or 10-year margin of 16. "If you're within that margin for error, then you have to go to a second stage and find some other way of confirming that somebody is over the legal age," said Mr Corby Even so, everyone agrees it will not be perfect. "I'm optimistic, having seen the results," said Mr Hammond. "Not necessarily making sure every 16-year-old doesn't get access, but making sure that most 16-year-olds don't get access to social media. "There's a number of solutions … and they have a level of accuracy. Now, whether the accuracy is good enough is a different question." Professor Given sees the end of the tech trial as an opportunity to reconsider the ban. "A responsible decision from government would be weighing up the evidence in front of them and deciding whether that's actually a robust approach," she said. In the meantime, public expectations of the policy remain undeterred. "I think it's a really positive move for our young people," said the principal of John Paul College, Craig Wattam. "I think that limiting their exposure to places that are potentially really dangerous is a really liberating thing," he said. On the question of the tech's accuracy, he is also an optimist. "I guess this is the whole purpose of a trial," he said. A spokesperson for Communications Minister Anika Wells told ABC News the government would be guided by advice from the eSafety Commissioner on how best to implement the ban. "We know that social media age-restrictions will not be the end-all be-all solution for harms experienced by young people online, but it's a step in the right direction to keep our kids safer," they said.
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Yahoo
Jetstar passenger request raises questions about popular menu items: 'Do better'
On a Thursday afternoon Jetstar flight, just minutes after meals were eaten, an attendant pushing a trolley asked passengers to separate their rubbish. 'Jetstar aims to recycle as much as possible,' the employee said. In Australia, it's a legal requirement passengers follow directions from flight crews, so everyone dutifully decoupled their beer bottles, Pringles packets, noodle boxes and forks. The attendant placed each item into separate plastic bags, but how many items were actually recycled remains a mystery. Most of us have been sorting our rubbish to help the planet for decades, but airlines have only recently started in-flight recycling of waste generated by the menu items they sell. Sustainability experts have welcomed the change, but say airlines must be completely transparent about their recycling efforts. Professor Lisa Given, an expert in innovation at RMIT, advocates for improvements in corporate social responsibility. She believes airlines have an added obligation to keep customers informed about waste processing because they assume responsibility for its processing by collecting it. 'Consumers need transparency… We want to see exactly what the airlines are doing on their side, and recycling is a big part of that,' she told Yahoo News. Jeff Angel, founder of waste-reduction non-profit Total Environment Centre, agrees, noting environment-conscious travellers are concerned about what happens to their rubbish. 'There's a very strong responsibility on the airlines to come clean on exactly what they're doing with recycling, and do better,' he said. 'If companies want to avoid concerns about greenwashing, they need to be rigorously transparent.' On international flights, it's often a biosecurity requirement that airlines hand over their waste to authorities, but domestically they have control over the rubbish they generate. Jetstar's onboard recycling program for domestic flights began in June 2023, and since then, it's 'collected' an impressive 135 tonnes, of which 60 tonnes was in the 2024 fiscal year. "While we're proud of their efforts, we know there's more work to do to enhance the program," its head of cabin crew Andrew Sinclair told Yahoo in a statement. 'We're continuing to work on improving our waste reduction and recycling initiatives, including sourcing in-flight products that use recyclable materials where possible, as well as making changes to meal packaging.' Virgin Australia is yet to begin in-flight recycling outside of Western Australia, but is in the process of changing waste providers to expand the practice to the east coast. "We recognise that we have a way to go but are actively progressing our key initiatives," a Virgin spokesperson said. Qantas's sustainability efforts are harder to understand. Yahoo sent several questions to the airline nine days ago, but it has yet to deliver a response. According to the airline's 2024 sustainability report, it had in-flight recycling covering 85 per cent of its networks, and collected 165 tonnes of commingled recycling. Twenty-five per cent of its onshore recoverable waste was collected for recycling or reuse. Given would like to see airlines engage more about how they're becoming more sustainable, but she notes they need to have facts and figures to share. 'We're a captive audience when we're on a plane, there's an opportunity during the messages about putting on our seatbelts for takeoff and landing. There are a lot of communication mechanisms for airlines to tell their stories, but the critical thing is the story needs to be there in the first place,' she said. 'If their recycling story is a good one, I'm sure that they would want to put that in front of their consumer base," she added. Sustainability is not just about recycling. Another important factor is how items like packaging, in-flight menus, and even garbage bags are produced in the first place. In particular, many customers want to be assured the wood and paper used on board are not sourced from forests where endangered species live. Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification is an assurance that the trees are harvested responsibly. Virgin's menus are FSC-certified and have an anti-bacterial covering that makes them more resilient, reducing wastage by up to 30 per cent. Its boarding passes, bag tags, and sick bags are also certified. Because personal information is printed on boarding passes, Virgin leaves it up to customers to recycle them independently. Bag tags can also go in the yellow bin, but only if the eyelet and string are removed. Sick bags are more of a problem because they're coated in plastic to prevent them from leaking. Other items used on Virgin flights, including tray liners, cart seals, napkins and water bottles, are made from 100 per cent recycled materials. We were unable to determine whether Qantas or Jetstar use ethically sourced paper. However, one notable Qantas achievement is that it began progressively switching from plastic cutlery to FSC-approved wooden alternatives in 2001. When it comes to plastic bags, all of those used in toilets are made from 100 per cent recycled plastic. The airline claims it hasn't been able to find a recycled product strong enough for its catering bags, but this is currently under review. Jetstar and Qantas did not provide any information on this subject to Yahoo. In France, short-haul flights have been banned to push travellers onto trains, which are more environmentally friendly. Fast trains are already the preferred option for domestic travel in Japan and China, and there are promises of similar services being developed in Australia, which if delivered could put pressure on airlines to lift their game. All three airlines have bold ambitions to have zero landfill, excluding quarantine waste, with Qantas and Jetstar committing to 2030 and Virgin 2032. While this is commendable, many consumers are sceptical when companies make announcements that won't be achieved until well into the future. For instance, Toohey's announced it would phase out single-use plastic by the end of 2025, but that proved 'expensive' and the beer company said it needed more time. Coca-Cola also walked backwards on its plastic reduction commitments. Love Australia's weird and wonderful environment? 🐊🦘😳 Get our new newsletter showcasing the week's best stories.
Epoch Times
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
Experts Call for Digital Shift Amid Rising Election Waste
Australia's federal election has generated a record amount of paper, plastic, and cardboard waste, prompting experts to call for a shift to more sustainable—and possibly digital—voting methods. The Australian Electoral Commission says it prints around 55 million ballot papers, 25,000 copies of the electoral roll, and 12 million household guides. Along with that are 250,000 pencils and 250,000 There are also 80,000 cardboard ballot boxes, 1.4 million plastic security seals, and 20,000 lanyards—all of which will eventually head to a recycling station or landfill. It does not just happen once every three years at a federal election but is repeated on a smaller scale for every state and territory election and, on a larger scale, for every council and shire. The problem is only going to get bigger as the population grows: the 2025 federal election was Australia's biggest yet, with 710,000 more people on the electoral roll than in 2022. Calls for Reform The growing scale of elections has prompted calls to explore waste-minimising alternatives. Professor of Information Sciences at RMIT University, Lisa Given, thinks it's time to consider a more efficient approach to creating, using, recycling, and disposing of election materials, including possibly switching to online voting. Related Stories 3/12/2025 11/17/2024 'We need to think creatively about this,' Professor Given said. 'I'm of the view that if I can do my banking online and it's relatively secure, there must be a way for that to be scaled to other industries.' Mandatory ID Card a Prerequisite She pointed to Estonia, which has However, it relies on a mandatory ID card, which also allows Estonians to access a range of services, including accessing health records, government services, and secure digital signatures. Australians are required to vote in person, so online voting would require changes to the law. 'I think what we want to see is that the government actually decides, 'Hey, we should explore this and see what's possible,'' Given said. Current Efforts and Limitations Some Australian jurisdictions have begun experimenting with digital tools. The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Electoral Commission In New South Wales (NSW), the Electoral Commission has issued a formal request for information (RFI) on internet voting systems, but for now, the technology will be available only to an estimated 4,000 blind or low-vision voters in the state at the 2027 state election. Environmental Costs Beyond Paper Others argue that while digital voting remains controversial, Australia could take simpler steps to reduce election waste. University of Adelaide political analyst Clem Macintyre said he was 'not a fan' of online voting, citing global concerns about electoral integrity. 'I think while we've got the mood around the world where the results of elections that appear clear-cut and honest are doubted, the more physical evidence you can show for an outcome, the better,' he said. However, he would favour a ban on corflute signs—many of which are not recycled—similar to that imposed by South Australia, and an end to how-to-vote cards. 'They're generally single-use, and the more that we can just stop creating them, the better off the environment is going to be,' he said. Most councils require corflutes to be collected within seven days of an election, but no rules govern their reuse or disposal. While they are made from recyclable polypropylene, a lightweight plastic, most recycling facilities do not accept them. In 2019, India's election commission directed parties to eliminate single-use plastic, including corflutes. AAP contributed to this story.
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The astonishing election numbers Aussies don't see: 'This is a problem'
Across 7,000 polling places, the Australian Electoral Commission used 250,000 pencils, 240,000 branded vests, 80,000 ballot boxes and 5,000 rolls of tamper-proof tape. So you might be wondering what happens to all those materials now. As most of us were watching the vote counting unfold on television, staffers were busily emptying out schools, community halls, and churches. And it might bring you some joy to read that most of the items will either be reused or recycled. The AEC told Yahoo News the voting booths, tamper tape, vests and pencils are stored away for reuse in future elections, and voting booths are either recycled or donated to schools and charities. But environmental experts believe Australia could be doing better when it comes to elections. Particularly major political parties like Labor, Liberal and the Greens, who all use polypropylene corflutes and soft plastic advertising signage. RMIT Professor of Information Sciences, Lisa Given, has published a detailed plan in The Conversation about reforming Australian elections. Speaking with Yahoo News, she noted several other countries are doing a better job at running them more sustainably. 'We're lagging behind India… Its election commission has directed parties not to use single-use plastics,' she said in relation to a 2019 direction that did away with corflutes. The AEC has shifted away from using white-coloured ballot boxes to brown cardboard which is more easily recyclable. Given believes political parties should consider following its lead with their own advertising. Incredible reason bridge to Aussie holiday island is going dark Five huge climate opportunities await the next parliament Sad mystery as another huge shark washes up on beach When it comes to the materials used by the AEC, the problem isn't as simple as doing away with paper ballots and cardboard voting booths and going digital. Most people know that ChatGPT and Bitcoin use massive amounts of power, and running computers to count and tally votes would also be energy-intensive. Given would like to see the AEC introduce an energy and waste reduction strategy for elections. But she believes the problem will only be truly combatted by pressure from average Australians who want to see change. 'I haven't seen a lot of change in the types of materials used between elections. I think government needs to bring in mandates, but that will likely only occur if the population says, hey, this is a problem, we need to tackle it,' she said. Love Australia's weird and wonderful environment? 🐊🦘😳 Get our new newsletter showcasing the week's best stories.
