Gate Square “Creator Certification Incentive Program” — Recruiting Outstanding Creators!
Join now, share quality content, and compete for over $10,000 in monthly rewards.
How to Apply:
1️⃣ Open the App → Tap [Square] at the bottom → Click your [avatar] in the top right.
2️⃣ Tap [Get Certified], submit your application, and wait for approval.
Apply Now: https://www.gate.com/questionnaire/7159
Token rewards, exclusive Gate merch, and traffic exposure await you!
Details: https://www.gate.com/announcements/article/47889
Meta's enforcement arm just got more aggressive—the company has pulled over 544,000 Instagram and Facebook accounts from Australian users under 18 as part of the country's new age restriction framework.
Here's what went down: Australia's pushing strict age verification rules, and Meta responded by taking a hard line. The scale is pretty massive—half a million accounts nuked in what amounts to a compliance blitz. Whether you see this as necessary protection or digital authoritarianism probably depends on your perspective.
The broader picture matters here. Platforms are increasingly caught between regulatory pressure and user experience. When governments mandate age gates, companies face a choice: implement soft restrictions that users bypass easily, or go nuclear and ban accounts outright. Meta chose the latter.
For the Web3 and crypto community specifically, this raises questions worth thinking about. As more governments regulate digital spaces, we're seeing a pattern: centralized platforms make arbitrary decisions, enforce them unilaterally, and users get caught in the crossfire. It's the kind of scenario that fuels arguments for decentralized alternatives where rules are transparent and disputes aren't settled by corporate policy teams.