imo there's a big difference between a world where privacy is uncommon and one where privacy is unattainable

In ICT circles, sure, on the nightly news it's crickets.

We know very little beyond:

1. It will go live on 10 December 2025
2. There will be heavy fines.
3. Government ID is not allowed to be the only method.
4. A self declaration (tick box) is insufficient as a check.

There are to my knowledge no third party providers approved for this legislation. The process to assess actual implementation details started in July 2025, and the results thus far are underwhelming to put it mildly, you might call it a shitshow.

Below is the official sum total of what we know, most of it motherhood statements and "coming soon".

https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/industry-regulation/social-media-age-restrictions

Media commentary wants to "protect the children", but have no idea how you might do so, let alone consider the implications or implementation details.

Source: I'm an ICT professional with 40+ years experience.

They'll use machine learning to determine based on your behaviour if you're under 16, then they'll ask for proof of age. They are required to have multiple options and none of them are allowed to be a checkbox. Sites are also supposed to take measures against circumvention by VPN whatever that means. You can easily circumvent this by not creating an account, unless you rely on the YouTube subscription feed like I do (though I've got a fallback now).

I personally support the idea of restricting social media, but banning accounts is the complete opposite of what's needed. The algorithm should be what's banned.