Part 4: Enforcement Vibes, Surveillance Infrastructure & The Reasonable Steps Fantasy
We've covered scope, impact, liability, and monopoly fallout. But now comes the juiciest bit: how exactly is this chaos going to be enforced?
Spoiler: it's not clear. And that's the point.
🧑✈️ Enforcement? More Like Vibe-Based Compliance Theatre
The bill doesn't just lack clarity - it worships the ambiguity.
"Platforms must take reasonable steps..."
Cool. What does that mean?
🤷♂️
Not defined in law.
Not detailed in regulation.
Just "whatever the eSafety Commissioner deems appropriate at the time."
That's not regulation. That's a spiritual compliance pilgrimage. You don't meet the requirements - you ascend to them.
And without a written standard, you're left playing legal Calvinball.
Government messaging so far:
"We'll release guidance. Later."
Or my personal favourite:
"We're trialling tech solutions and will report back in August."
And those "guidelines" won't be rules, just suggestions… which you can still be fined for ignoring if they don't align with the regulator's "current thinking." Translation: if your lawyer interprets the vibes wrong, enjoy your $49 million invoice.
🔍 Reasonable Steps = Legal Minefield
Let's play "guess the rules" based on the fever dream of public comments so far:
✅ AI-based facial age estimation
✅ Uploading a government-issued ID
✅ Third-party verification using bank, SIM card, or credit card data
✅ Cross-referencing "public" records (because nothing says privacy like a reverse lookup on your voter roll)
✅ Phone number plus geolocation checks
✅ A 17-step onboarding funnel that makes Centrelink look like Amazon Prime
Two inevitable side effects:
Unpayable dev costs for anyone who isn't Meta, Google, or a crypto scam with $50M in VC money.
Honeypots of personal data so massive that the dark web starts taking out banner ads.
And just for fun, they've also said you can't require ID as the only option. Sounds like a privacy win, right? Until you realise it means you now have to offer multiple verification methods, maintain all of them, and handle the security implications for each.
Because sure - nothing like maintaining three different ID pipelines and a selfie-AI-check just so someone can comment "first" under a skateboarding video.
🧠 The Surveillance System Nobody Voted For
If this feels like déjà vu, it's because this is exactly how biometric creep happens:
"We just want to make sure kids are safe."
"We just want to know your age."
"We just want to know it's you."
"We just want to log your activity for public health research."
"We just want to link that to your tax and medical history, for safety."
By the time anyone notices, you've built a national surveillance mesh - not with spyware, but with "compliance tooling." No dystopian warning siren, no Big Brother posters. Just another modal that says Age Verification Required.
🪤 The Trap Is Already Set
The infrastructure's already half-built. myID is here and already required for certain government services.
All it takes is one regulation tweak and suddenly:
Want to post a meme? Log in with the same system you use to do your tax return.
Want to stream Minecraft? Hope you're okay linking your gameplay to your Medicare record.
Want to join a knitting forum? Congratulations, you've just completed the same ID flow used for firearms licensing.
That's not hyperbole - it's the most logical outcome of this law's current trajectory. Not "if." When.
🏁 Final Thoughts: What The Hell Do We Do Now?
Let's sum it up:
The law is intentionally vague.
Definitions are expandable at will.
Enforcement is vibe-based.
Verification is expensive and undefined.
Privacy protections are laughable.
Small business is dead.
Big Tech consolidates further.
Kids still get the content anyway.
And all of it is sold to the public in the language of safety - so if you push back, clearly you must hate children.
No. Some of us just don't believe "protecting the kids" requires building a permanent, government-mandated ID checkpoint at the front door of the internet.