Computerphile
June 16, 2026
TL;DR
A technical analysis of how governments could implement age-based social media bans, examining blocking methods at routers, ISPs, devices, and platform level, and exploring the feasibility and tradeoffs of each approach.
“If you're determined to lie about your age, to steal someone's credit card, right, to put a fake mustache on, yes, you will get around these things.”
— Host
“The only perfect system would be everyone has some kind of barcode tattooed on their hand and you know there's someone sitting over your shoulder all the time.”
— Host
“Maybe if you make YouTube Kids as good as YouTube for kids, then they don't even care about going on YouTube, right? That would be the biggest win for me, I think.”
— Host
“I think as a society we don't think children are well served by social media right now and I don't think the social media companies have been seen to be particularly proactive in doing anything about this now they have to.”
— Host
1. The Problem and Government Proposal
Governments propose banning under-16s from major social media platforms like TikTok due to addictive design and problematic content. The technical challenge is implementing such a ban across diverse internet access methods.
2. Network Architecture and Blocking Points
Home networks, ISPs, and mobile providers form a chain from device to server. Blocks could theoretically occur at the router, ISP, or phone company level, but each has significant practical limitations.
3. Home Router and ISP-Level Blocking
Technologies like Pi Hole can block DNS requests, but implementation requires technical expertise beyond average users. ISP-level blocks fail because children access the internet from multiple networks (friends' homes, cafés) where others shouldn't be restricted.
4. Device-Level Controls
Apple Screen Time and Google Family Link allow parent control, but rely on accurate age data during phone setup. Users easily circumvent by entering false birthdates, and concentrating gatekeeping power in two companies raises governance concerns.
5. Platform-Level Age Verification Methods
Government regulation targets social media companies directly. Proposed verification methods include government ID APIs, facial recognition AI, credit card checks, and third-party verifiers like Yoti, each with distinct tradeoffs.
6. Government ID and Privacy Concerns
Digital ID verification is technically feasible and most secure, but public and policy resistance cites privacy concerns. Users could impersonate others by entering false credentials despite API checks.
7. Facial Recognition Limitations
AI age-detection models are not 100% accurate and struggle with rapid child development variation. Australia's experience showed fake mustaches defeating facial recognition systems, demonstrating insufficient rigor.
8. Alternative Verification: Credit Cards and Phone Providers
Credit card requirements assume age thresholds, but teenagers can access cards via parents or fintech apps. Phone OS providers (Apple/Google) already know device age and could verify without extra steps, but inherit the same falsification risks.
9. Accepting Imperfection and Cultural Shift
No system is perfect; determined users will circumvent via VPNs, fake documents, or borrowed accounts. The model mirrors drink-driving policy: gradual cultural normalization that discourages most people without catching everyone.
10. Opportunity for Safe Alternatives
Rather than only restricting platforms, companies should develop age-appropriate versions (e.g., YouTube Kids improvements). Strong parent support (~90%) and international adoption suggest this approach will persist despite technical imperfection.