51–60 of 457 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does it have to be a phone? Some people still use tablets, laptops and, believe it or not, desktop PCs.
Smartphones are much more ubiquitous than any of those devices. Across all demographics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny you use Netherlands as a good example, considering that famously, their existing unusually thorough registry was super helpful for the Nazis rounding up jews later. I don't think it's Godwin's Law when you are so spot on, exactly describing the worst case.
Why would an age verification app need to know your ethnicity/religion? Governments likely already know your name, age, place of birth, so having an app with a standard API for verifying users isn't giving the government additional data.
so it will gather extra data, sell it sideways and leak like hell. (as they already do with all the data they already have)
Funny how the worry of "digital exclusion" of the elders who would never be able to use a smartphone has been thrown out of the window in recent years.
Additionally the amount of elderly that don't have or can't use a phone or don't have anyone that can help them with it will decrease rapidly anyway. In my experience it's mostly the same generation as the people that remember WWII.
Regardless of whether you personally use Android or iOS, I think that we can all agree that it is not right to be forced to use a specific platform in order to access almost any Internet services.
Yeah, I am leaning towards never to use anything that is forced to implement any kind of age verification.
Well, they could change the laws to force people into slavery here, e. g. by forcing them to use US corporations ("if you do not have an app from Google store, you are excluded from society"). In that case they see age sniffing as ultimate tool of spying on everyone, so this is probably the real goal. What we all can see is that this has never been about children - they are just abused as the red hering here.
It would be a difficult choice but would it really be so bad to be excluded from such a society? Don't a lot of people from silicon valley dream to be farmers in the wildlands?
"EU age verification app to ban any Android system not licensed by Google" 27-jul-2025 https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyFromEU/comments/1mah79o/eu_age_v...
and
"EU age verification app not planning desktop support" 24-sep-2025 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45359074
I agree with the sentiment but is there even any phone that doesn't run Android (or derivatives) or iOS and that can install modern "apps"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I said it before and I will say it again: We should invest our energy in the discussion whether to implement it and not already wonder how to implement it. Shifting this question benefits only those who want to force this upon us.
Doesn't the "how to implement" determine whether to implement it? A poor implementation shouldn't be done, but a good implementation could make it simpler for companies to verify the ages of users, limit information passed to companies, offer a quality of life improvement for users.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't AOSP a thing?
Writings on the wall can’t be clearer on AOSP’s future…
We have a definition at the beginning, for "Social media and other digital services (in short, social media+)":
“Within the scope of this report, the terms ‘social media+’ and ‘social media and other digital services’, are used to broadly define services that may be available to minors and contain age-inappropriate and/or risky features (for example, addictive and harmful features, among which infinite scroll, autoplay, recommendation algorithms and persistent notifications) and/or content. Social media and other digital services providers include online platforms serving as intermediaries of content from third parties, such as social media, as well as app stores. AI systems posing risks to minors’ safety and development, including AI companions, video games exposing children to harmful commercial practices or dangerous contacts, and video-sharing platforms enabling age-inappropriate access to minors are also included.”
So, let's see, services that may contain age-inappropriate and/or risky content, "online platforms serving as intermediaries of content from third parties".
How quickly can you come up with something that wouldn't fall in that definition?
It seems that anything that allows user-contributed content (such as plain old forums) or communication among users would be comprised in it.
And, yes, to be sure we explicitly include app stores (I guess including e.g. F-Droid, and what about software repositories?) and video games with intercommunication features.
What is this definition used for?
Recommendation 1 of chapter 3: “A harmonised EU-wide access restriction to *social media and other digital services*, including AI companions, for children under 13 is necessary.”
This is a report, not law, but it was commissioned by Ursula von der Leyen and “The report is intended to inform future actions to be proposed by the European Commission and EU Member States to reinforce child safety online.”