I've said this before, but if countries want to mandate compliance, they should be required to provide the mechanism for compliance.

The rollout of this has been pretty rough all things considered, much of it because the mechanism for compliance is flawed. Anthony Albanese's latest instgram posts are full of comments from teens saying things like, "how am i still on instagram if you banned us". The primary reason for this is most providers are leveraging age-estimation techniques, because the law specifically states:

    > 63DB Use of certain identification material and services

    >   (1) A provider of an age-restricted social media platform must not:

    >     (a) collect government-issued identification material

In an effort to prevent identity theft, the bill as originally written(1) was updated(2) to forbid platforms from collecting government IDs as a proof of age. Even if you support the intent of the bill, the design-by-committee approach made the requirements so easy to circumvent that it's effectively security theater.

(1) Original bill: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bi...

(2) Bill that passed after rewrites: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bi...