A recent trial of age-checking technology intended to enforce a social media ban for under-16s has raised serious concerns about its effectiveness. The technology, which includes face-scanning, was only able to estimate ages within an 18-month range in 85% of cases during government tests on school students.
Inaccuracy Issues
The trial results showed significant inaccuracies, with some 15-year-olds being misidentified as being in their 20s and 30s. For instance, a 16-year-old student was identified as 19, 37, 26, and 23 years old by different face-scanning tools. Similarly, a 17-year-old was given age estimates ranging from 14 to 32.
Experts, including Professor Lisa Given from RMIT University, argue that the ban is not viable due to these inaccuracies. “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.
Alternative Methods
The industry body for age-checking companies suggests that face scanning is just one part of the solution. Other methods being considered include age estimation based on biological traits like voice and hand movements, as well as verifying age using data from third parties such as banks or government-issued IDs.
However, the legislation prevents social media companies from requiring government-issued IDs as proof of age, and instead mandates that they offer alternative methods. This could lead to under-16s attempting to circumvent the ban by using less accurate methods like face scanning.
Potential Solutions
One potential solution is a cascade-style system, where users who are within a certain age margin (e.g., 5-10 years) of the age limit are required to provide additional proof of age. “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 Iain Corby from the Age Verification Providers Association.
While experts acknowledge that no system will be perfect, some remain optimistic that a combination of methods can achieve sufficient accuracy. The government is expected to decide on the implementation details in the coming months, guided by advice from the eSafety Commissioner.
Despite the technical challenges, some stakeholders, including the principal of John Paul College, remain supportive of the ban, believing it will be beneficial for young people. However, experts caution that the government should carefully weigh the evidence and consider whether the technology is robust enough to support the policy.
