Yoti Remember Me ID. https://yoti.my.site.com/yotisupport/s/article/What-is-a-Rem...
That specific link is basically just "having an account" if anonymity is turned off.
If you include the anonymous version are you calling a basic cookie an "advertiser's dream"? Then that's not something new they would get if the cookie tracked age verification. And you can reset cookies every visit (or more often). The "that person" of a site-specific session cookie is not a big deal for privacy.
Need we remind Anthropic of the 153 million drirvers licenses available for sale on the dark web thanks to a 3rd party ID verification service? https://krebsonsecurity.com/2026/09/fbi-probes-service-selli... The fact that Anthropic only receives a result, not the data itself, does not make me feel any better about this. I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the co…
> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. And if your parents suck? (Mine did.) I think the power for parents to have free reign over everything in a child's life should be reduced if the parents are abusive, but of course there is no way to do this short of infallible and invasive surveillance. All to say, there is no easy solution here. Abusive parents are not going to…
Everyone's parents "suck"--they're humans, they're learning, they have problems of their own they struggle with, etc. There are no purely good parents. I'm not excusing actually wretched family conditions, but have been noticing almost every young adult now deplores an unfair childhood--and I can't help but think we'd all be healthier if we could recognize that a childhood with some problems is statistically quite "fair."
"We have safety systems in place to detect if people under 18 may be using Claude and we’ll disable accounts based on indicators of minor activity. "... so how is Musk supposed to make vulgar memes with Claude? Wouldn't it get flagged as teenage humor?
Claude Executive: Damn, we hardly know who our users are, can't we just force them to say their full name or ban them? Claude Product Manager: No, that'll piss people off too much, and sadly we can't just ask for ID either... Claude Executive: There must be some way we can force people to link their government IDs with our platform so our analytics get better and more accurate? Claude Product Manager: We could limit…
It's crazy that the top comment on HN these days is this kind of crackpot conspiracy thinking.
Trying to collect personal info might not be the motivation but it's not at all a crackpot theory. And what's the conspiracy aspect of calling a big company a liar?
Your dismissal is so much weaker than the post you're replying to.
Good that we have Chinese models now, we can host anywhere and use as much as we like without age verification. Also, what's the reason banning minors? Is AI bad for mental health? If so, should companies also ban them to prevent burnout of their employees?
I suspect that the money they get from minors using their services is simply not worth the risk of the negative publicity from the not-unheard-of "Claude told this minor to do !!" articles in the media.
which, unfortunately, empowers the professional crybullies behind such articles further.
imagine the current year reaction to the Judas Priest trial. we'd have instagram newspeak like "unalive" in album titles and song lyrics from now on.
Right this is exactly what happened with the new sesame laws. The government declared sesame as an allergen and enacted heavy fines if it was undisclosed. This lead to manufacturers adding sesame because they couldn't guarantee they were sesame free.
do you have an example of this? it feels like a suboptimal response even given the stupid, heavy-handed legislation you cite.
> Many companies now routinely attach Prop 65 warning labels to any product of theirs that they think might possibly contain one of the 900 listed chemicals without testing to see whether the chemical is really present in their product and without reformulating their product, because it is cheaper to do so than to run the risk of being sued by Prop 65 enforcers.
Unless you have Bill Gates money, you don't have access to a mental health professional (much less your mental health professional who knows your life situation) when a girlfriend dumps you over text at 1AM. And that's when you may need one most. People want to talk to their therapist after an argument with their husband or when their boss fires them, not Friday after next.
>> Unless you have Bill Gates money, you don't have access to a mental health professional I'm not sure where you live. I know almost all colleges in the US have walk in free mental health counseling, along with free telesupport. My company has onsite mental health professionals who you can talk to or call at any time. There are free mental health clinics all over my city. There's mental health professionals who did…
> I know almost all colleges in the US have walk in free mental health counseling
I've been to two universities and this was not the case from the university itself, especially outside of normal business hours. If you didn't have an emergency, you had to wait months, if you had an emergency (I was explicitly told the only way to see someone anytime soon was if I said I'd kill myself if I didn't get an appointment and then they'd see if there was someone available) you might be able to talk to someone sooner. After hours emergencies maybe the psych ward at the hospital would see you? There's free resources, but universities aren't really providing much.
> children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. I know my opinion is not popular, but I do not agree that it is the states responsibility to pick up the slack for bad parenting.
Define bad parenting? Should the state do nothing about children not being sent to school? Should they go hungry when not fed? Should we just throw the kids in jail instead of programs that provide support? The libertarian "eh whatever" means of government has a lot of negative side effects too.
I don't think it's an either or situation. We are on the precipice of a paradigm that's barely comprehensible to the average populace. There needs to be a conversation first before anything is decided. Everyone is too quick on the trigger.
> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. I am strongly sympathetic of this point. But, also, children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. This is an extremely difficult balancing act. Various laws and organizations get it wrong all the time, but it does require balance because there is no simple solution here that just works. There…
> children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. I had an abusive caregiver as a child and I can confidently say that age-gating websites wouldn't have done shit to help me. The way to protect these children is through the family court and foster care systems, which are both seriously under-resourced and overwhelmed.
There's different kinds of shitty and they didn't mean that kind.