71–80 of 175 posts
If governments want to set up online age gates, they should be responsible for providing an electronic ID system and enable privacy preserving age verification (zero knowledge proofs)
Who is "government" Is it not the people? The people don't want this crap. It's a few zealots with their motives that are pushing this down society.
The writing was on the wall for years - it's not the 90s anymore and some compromise on anonymity and verification is coming. Frankly for good reason - I think the social utility of Big Social is massively negative, and even more so for kids.
That was the shot of orgs like EFF to help shape the debate in a good direction. Zero knowledge proofs, anonymity preserving age checks, good govt regulation on this etc.
Instead they all dug their heels in, refused to give an inch or even engage in the debate. If you wanted anything other that a Toresque utopia then you clearly want Big Brother to keep tabs on everything, and you're probably a moron who thinks you have "nothing to hide".
So they vacated the space while Mumsnet users came to the only logical conclusion: let's ban social media for kids, with whatever method comes to their mind. Scanning their ID, face scans, fingerprints connected to a government DB ran by the cheapest contractor - who knows how this will materialise. And I kind of can't blame them. The adults of internet privacy vacated the room because they said everyone else in the room is too stupid. So they left and left the stupid people in charge.
If governments want to set up online age gates, they should be responsible for providing an electronic ID system and enable privacy preserving age verification (zero knowledge proofs)
Who is "government" Is it not the people? The people don't want this crap. It's a few zealots with their motives that are pushing this down society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't use the site then? Or sites can compete on which age verifies in the least shitty way? I think we have been stuck in this way of life so long we can't imagine an alternative.
Classic. So tell me how I can just not deal with the credit bureaus? Or tax filing companies? Or any site that sells my data to adtech, without totally secluding myself from the modern web? Where’s the supposed competition? What you’re saying is functionally equivalent to “just deal with it,” since ultimately people will choose to have their privacy violated over the lifelong Sisyphean task of trying to avoid all of…
"This week, politicians in the UK pushed forward with plans to eviscerate privacy and free speech on the internet by announcing a ban on social media for users under 16 that is set to take effect in Spring 2027." Is "social media" the internet Does "social media", i.e., "Big Tech", preserve privacy or eviscerate it. "Internet privacy" is been in direct conflict with their "business model". They engage in sweeping dat…
If governments want to set up online age gates, they should be responsible for providing an electronic ID system and enable privacy preserving age verification (zero knowledge proofs)
Who is "government" Is it not the people? The people don't want this crap. It's a few zealots with their motives that are pushing this down society.
People just don't understand the problems implementing AVS.
I'd be much much happier submitting details or a face scan to a .gov.uk service than all these rando verification services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who is "government" Is it not the people? The people don't want this crap. It's a few zealots with their motives that are pushing this down society.
I want it. As someone who’s trying to keep their kids off screens and social media it’s easier to win the battle when it’s illegal. If I have to provide ID I’ll probably stop using it to and that’s good. Shit is garbage. Hopefully this becomes a global thing and we might get classic internet back, when it was actually good, before social media…
The EFF is very wrong on this one. Some things are bad and we should keep children away from them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>it only makes sense if all parents together get their kids off these platforms Yes, and the wishes of all parents together != the wishes of the UK government which has its own agenda at play in which to weaponize this public outrage for their own benefit(mass surveillance and mass censorship). The UK government doesn't actually want what's best for all the children of all the parents, otherwise it wouldn't have allo…
>Yes, and the wishes of all parents together != the wishes of the UK government This legislation has widespread support among British parents across the political spectrum[1] "As YouGov has shown previously, such a policy would be widely popular with the general public. In our latest survey, looking more specifically at the views of parents, we find that 77% of those with children under the age of 18 would support a…
Because parents like most voters, are incredibly stupid, and just want to delegate accountability of their kids to the state, not that they actually understand the repercussions of what they're supporting. Same with brexit. Voters want a scapegoat on why their kids are stupid(er), and the government is happy to offer a monkey paw.