The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online • Hacker News Board

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#81

Post by microgpt » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:08 PM UTC

throw0101d wrote: post #68

We're approaching forty years of this: > The term was coined by Timothy C. May in 1988. May referred to "child pornographers, terrorists, drug dealers, etc.".[1] May used the phrase to express disdain for what he perceived as "think of the children" argumentation by government officials and others seeking to justify limiting the civilian use of cryptography tools. > The phrase is a play on Four Horsemen of the Apocal…

sometimes it's true. We ruined the brains of a whole generation of people. Should we stop doing that? If so, how?

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#82

Post by microgpt » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:09 PM UTC

andai wrote: post #73

shomp wrote: post #23

call and email your congresspeoples, and tell them not to go through with this

Isn't it interesting how they're doing it in every anglo country simultaneously? How does that work?

Because the internet is global and the negative effects of the internet are happening everywhere at the same time. Also, politicians look at other countries for ideas.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#83

Post by pessimizer » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:10 PM UTC

api wrote: post #49

edot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no technological fix for the issue you raise. The issue being parents not wanting to bother raising their kids, and thus giving the state and corporations control over what they can and can’t do. That’s a cultural issue. No idea how to solve it.

It's largely a wealth inequality issue. Rich parents can have nannies, expensive software, or a parent who stays home from work. Poorer parents do not have time or energy to police this stuff or supervise their kids. They're too busy putting food on the table and paying rent or a mortgage.

Rich parents can not prevent their children from accessing pornography and social media on the internet, and will also not be able to do so after this legislation.

Pornography is often delivered by people who don't care about US legislation, and social media is carefully left undefined, intentionally confounded with algorithms used to surface content (which people actually do object to at least the opaqueness of.)

I, like most, don't think that the totalitarianism is an unfortunate side-effect of the attempt to protect children online. I think legislation, and legislation like this, will only be successful in increasing surveillance and public manipulation, and that it will have virtually no effect on childrens' consumption of pornography and social media. If you really wanted to protect children, there's better legislation to write and technical solutions to implement.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#84

Post by dogcatdog » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:10 PM UTC

gustavus wrote: post #54

dogcatdog wrote: post #50

That sounds like a reasonable aim. Online services should be responsible for implementing age verification checks on content that children shouldn't be accessing, just like vendors of alcohol and nicotine products are responsible for age verification. The EFF likes to frame everything that might even slightly rein in online service providers as being a terrible assault on online freedom and therefore, in their view,…

I hate this analogy because it isn't true. This isn't like a clerk checking your age before you buy booze this is like a clerk taking a photocopy of your ID and a list of everything you bought and then storing those records forever every time you buy alcohol.

Most stores already have continuously-recording CCTV, which effectively does that too.

At least online there can be a separation between the age verification provider and the online content provider, so that the latter doesn't learn anything from the former except that the user's age is above or below a specific cut-off point. So it can actually be more privacy-preserving than purchasing age-restricted goods over the counter.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#85

Post by microgpt » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:10 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #48

shomp wrote: post #23

call and email your congresspeoples, and tell them not to go through with this

We do not need to lose our rights to privacy because people want to control what their kids do and see. (I'm not even convinced this is true - this is likely just a convenient lie told by the politicians, because I don't see parents clamoring for this.) We're below replacement rate, so it's not like most people are even having kids, anyway. Yet we have to give up our freedom for other people to raise little Christian…

When did you grow up? The internet in 2006 and 2026 were nothing alike.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#86

Post by vegetablepotpie » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:11 PM UTC

none2585 wrote: post #41

shomp wrote: post #23

call and email your congresspeoples, and tell them not to go through with this

Then donate millions in campaign contributions to ensure they actually care at all what you think!

Coordinated opposition campaigns against misinformed and dangerous legislation has been effective in stopping bad laws [1]. After a website blackout, including a Wikipedia shutdown, lawmakers in Washington decided not to proceed with the Stop Online Privacy Act in 2012.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#87

Post by microgpt » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:11 PM UTC

EGreg wrote: post #62

Oh for goodness’ sake, can’t the government (federal or states) create a service that will simply give out a token when someone has passed the age they want (eg 18), and provably goes through a multipart mixer, or just give you a zero-knowledge proof on the device of your choice, anytime you need? On a related note, if they will require a specific kind of ID to vote, can’t they just make sure everyone can receive tha…

It can't, because the government doesn't know shit about technology. Someone who knows tech, is close to the government, and isn't corrupt, would have to propose it and explain what this zorro-proof knowy doohicky is. The government knows ID checks because you get checked at bars.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#88

Post by failbuffer » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:11 PM UTC

dogcatdog wrote: post #50

That sounds like a reasonable aim. Online services should be responsible for implementing age verification checks on content that children shouldn't be accessing, just like vendors of alcohol and nicotine products are responsible for age verification. The EFF likes to frame everything that might even slightly rein in online service providers as being a terrible assault on online freedom and therefore, in their view,…

Aims aside, did you even read the article? This will mostly end anonymity online and require heavier policing of content.

A child might see something they shouldn't walking down the street, strolling thru the park, visiting the local zoo, or visiting an ice cream parlor. Should those places be requiring identification and hiring extra security guards to wander around making sure nobody is saying it doing anything politically objectionable?

Let's not accept creeping digital tyranny with self-assuring complacency... call or write (preferably snail mail) your congresspeople!!

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#89

Post by echelon » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:12 PM UTC

shevy-java wrote: post #75

So, the mafia now reveals its evil face. It wants to censor young people's way to access information, without conforming to an "age check". This is the first step, the next is to require of this of everyone else. This is the biggest attack on personal freedom since decades. It is time to crush those lobbyists that push for this. By the way, even ignoring the propaganda by the lobbyists here, at which point did the "d…

> This is the first step, the next is to require of this of everyone else.

This is the threat day one. They get both groups' information.

Next, they'll start to purge information they don't like because it has been corralled off from the rest of the internet.

If they get lucky to trap a politician or billionaire in their net (and they will), they'll use that information to control how they vote or fund interests.

Next, they'll start to clamp down of people in the group they don't like. They'll lose jobs, banking, get extra audits, and have friction applied to their lives and chances of success.

Over time the fundamentalist group embraces government monitoring and control. The youth are brought up on it. The oligarchy use it to remove their enemies.

Within two generations we're living in 1984.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#90

Post by microgpt » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 2:12 PM UTC

PinkSheep wrote: post #43

api wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EDIT: about half to two thirds of the responders didn't catch "I'm not a fan of these proposed solutions." I am not saying I like these solutions. I am trying to explain why they have support among the general public. Many of these responses are the usual "shoot the messenger" response you get online when you point out what the "other side" thinks and why they think it even if you don't necessarily agree . On this is…

This kind of restrictions expects account control to work. For example, parent's account & separate child account on a device. For the same reasons you describe, it will be ineffective: not tech-savvy. Children will use their parent's/grandma's account on TV and phone, one that has long been verified as "adult" despite the Youtube recommendations consisting of 6-13yo content. If there were an organic push by parents,…

You're assuming the politicians think this will be 100% successful and not, say, 80% successful.