Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 485 posts

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#141

Post by butlike »

mjevans wrote: post #71

The Internet should be Unrated and thus Adults Only by default. Just like public spaces. (Would you allow an 8 year old to wander New York City unattended? Arguments can be made for more controlled spaces but...) Have a website and want the chance for kids to see it? Advertise in the headers that it's moderated and intended to be a given rating. Various indexers can pick that up. Complaints can be forward to relevant…

Attended or unattended, you still hear people cussin' and ranting and raving on the NYC subway lines.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#142

Post by lolinder »

mjevans wrote: post #136
cameldrv wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public spaces are most definitely not "Adults Only" by default. You're not allowed to have a big billboard with porn on it, you have to show ID to get into a bar, you have to show ID to buy a pack of cigarettes, and in many states the cigarettes have to be in an opaque cabinet. You can't walk around naked. You can't be drunk in public. Now admittedly many of these things are unevenly enforced, but society absolutely…

Nuanced difference: Everyone _has_ to traverse all of public to get anywhere, hence 'decency laws' so parents can take kids around without blindfolds. You're taking the metaphor a bit too literally.

> You're taking the metaphor a bit too literally.

Or maybe the metaphor is flawed?

GP says that public spaces are adult-only by default, the parent rightly points out this is nonsense: public spaces are Safe for Work (and for kids) by default, and you have to prove you're an adult to access the adult-only spaces. Which is exactly what laws like this are trying to do by analogy to the physical world.

It's not OP that's interpreting the metaphor too literally, the public-spaces metaphor is literally the main justification for these laws and GP doesn't understand how public spaces work.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#143

Post by repeekad »

qball wrote: post #112
mjevans wrote: post #71

The Internet should be Unrated and thus Adults Only by default. Just like public spaces. (Would you allow an 8 year old to wander New York City unattended? Arguments can be made for more controlled spaces but...) Have a website and want the chance for kids to see it? Advertise in the headers that it's moderated and intended to be a given rating. Various indexers can pick that up. Complaints can be forward to relevant…

>Adults Only by default. Just like public spaces. This is the attitude that led us to this problem in the first place. >Would you allow an 8 year old to wander New York City unattended? They're at much higher risk of being arrested/abducted by the police than they are anything else. This is a uniquely North American neurosis; this happens every day in every other nation. They take the subway to work/school or walk, l…

You really think a child is more likely to be abducted by police in NYC than anything else? What are you talking about?

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#144

Post by diddid »

qball wrote: post #112
mjevans wrote: post #71

The Internet should be Unrated and thus Adults Only by default. Just like public spaces. (Would you allow an 8 year old to wander New York City unattended? Arguments can be made for more controlled spaces but...) Have a website and want the chance for kids to see it? Advertise in the headers that it's moderated and intended to be a given rating. Various indexers can pick that up. Complaints can be forward to relevant…

>Adults Only by default. Just like public spaces. This is the attitude that led us to this problem in the first place. >Would you allow an 8 year old to wander New York City unattended? They're at much higher risk of being arrested/abducted by the police than they are anything else. This is a uniquely North American neurosis; this happens every day in every other nation. They take the subway to work/school or walk, l…

I don’t think it’s entirely a mentality issue. I think North America created an environment where you wouldn’t want your 8 year old to navigate New York City. I would let my kids wander Tokyo before I would let them wander Chicago. Japan would not tolerate people spitting at and harassing children where Chicago does indeed tolerate that. I’d say ask me how I know but you could probably guess.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#145

Post by butlike »

ty6853 wrote: post #129
ndriscoll wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.lung.org/research/trends-in-lung-disease/tobacco... > Long term, smoking rates have fallen 73% among adults, from 42.6% in 1965 to 11.6% in 2022. > Long term, smoking rates have fallen 86% among youth, from 36.4% in 1997 to 3.8% in 2021. I'd say that's better off, not just in childhood but with long term effects.

[flagged]

Refined sugar and gambling are two of the hardest ones to quit.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#146

Post by twiclo »

9283409232 wrote: post #55
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's just too much money to be made selling porn to children.

No, there isn't. Almost all porn that is accessible to children is on freely available social media like instagram and twitter. Not on Pornhub.

Are you saying kids don't go to pornhub?

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#147

Post by butlike »

dinkblam wrote: post #3

age verification should be backed into the browser and not into websites. parents should be able to access a (password protected) setting in any browser that can exclude some types of websites (like porn). governments should be free to go after any website not respecting that setting. but forcing the age-verification onto websites is just moronic.

Kids have nothing but time and energy to learn about their world, so you get weird things like the children rootkitting your device or "the home computer" on their quest to see salacious corners of the web.

As always, parenting starts and stops with the parent. The internet should be open and if the child sees something that upsets them (or makes them question one of their assumptions), it's the parent's responsibility to cultivate an environment where the child feels comfortable talking about it with them.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#148

Post by twiclo »

ryandvm wrote: post #27
plasma_beam wrote: post #13

Am I missing something here? Entirely possible and likely. When I go to pornhub I have to click a button that days I’m 18. Some other sites I’ve seen actually make me enter a birthdate. Slightly more annoying but I always make one up. Is this what people are upset about? I get actual age verification with an account required or checking my ID is more invasive..but I guess I’ve not experienced this as an actual proble…

Certain US states are requiring the porn sites actually do rigorous age verification via scanned documents. I believe PornHub just opted to stay out of those states entirely hoping that their "reverse boycott" would cause enough of a backlash to get the laws changed. I'm not sure it's working. That said, as a parent to teenagers, I don't know that I believe that age verification is such a terrible idea. The reality i…

"Of course I have absolutely no interest in uploading scans of my drivers license to porn sites"

Would you be okay uploading your ID to online gambling sites?

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#149

Post by butlike »

bobthepanda wrote: post #6
dinkblam wrote: post #3

age verification should be backed into the browser and not into websites. parents should be able to access a (password protected) setting in any browser that can exclude some types of websites (like porn). governments should be free to go after any website not respecting that setting. but forcing the age-verification onto websites is just moronic.

it would be less terrible if there were some simple, Apple ID-like way to simply get redirected to a govt website, put in your driver's license, and the website only gets a token back that says "yes over age/no underage". The data already exists, it's what bars use to scan IDs with handheld readers IIRC.

"I'm 65 years old, and the age verification is failing"

Operator: "let me take a look sir. It's probably a bug. It's definitely not the censorship metrics opaquely changing behind the scenes, sir."

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#150

Post by ty6853 »

repeekad wrote: post #143
qball wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Adults Only by default. Just like public spaces. This is the attitude that led us to this problem in the first place. >Would you allow an 8 year old to wander New York City unattended? They're at much higher risk of being arrested/abducted by the police than they are anything else. This is a uniquely North American neurosis; this happens every day in every other nation. They take the subway to work/school or walk, l…

You really think a child is more likely to be abducted by police in NYC than anything else? What are you talking about?

Yes do you have children? I had the police called on me for taking my kid to the park last time i took a vacation out east to a big city. My kid is not the same 'race' as me ergo Karen called and they detained my child for an hour because that was suspicious (I filed FOIA and got bodycam and overheard the witch's complaint on the radio).

Now imagine there was no parent at all...

Post reply on HN