great, save the next generation from cognitive decline
Claude is only available to people over 18 years
641–648 of 648 posts
Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years
#642Earlier quoted context omitted.
Today's 13 year olds say that word more times than that before breakfast.
Which is, of course, a bad thing that ought not to be encouraged and that ubiquity does, in fact, encourage and normalize.
Yea. Nobody needs to be talking that much before breakfast.
Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years
#643Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years
#644I once heard someone suggest that this should be on the OS level and I'm slowly coming around to the idea. There should be some kind of OS level flag that can easily broadcast to products that a child is using the device. No ID verification required, the parent is responsible for setting it, and all downstream applications are regulated to respect it, If applicable to the product. This removes the incredibly invasive…
California passed a law AB-1043 that requires every OS developer to add age verification on the OS level. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/03/ab-1043s-internet-age-...
> every OS developer
They exempted Linux, from what I remember reading.
Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years
#645Aren't AI's already G-rated cos of the built-in guardrails?
Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years
#646Surprised to see that something many people are clamoring for (age verification for social media and ai usage) in many countries (eg Australia passed into law) for a good reason (studies showing the negative impact to teen mental health) is seen as only possibly due to some nefarious desire.
If you think about the history of abuse wrought upon the public by tech companies in regards to personal information, then the reaction really isn’t that surprising.
Are you really surprised that people are suspicious? Really?
Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years
#647Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s pretty much the heart of conspiracy theories and paranoia, yes. See apophenia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia
Yes, except these kinds of fears related to big tech/surveillance end up being true more often than not. Unsurprising given the profit incentives and the total lack of ethics in the industry. 10+ years ago you were considered a lunatic if you told people that putting internet-connected cameras and microphones everywhere is a bad idea because their TV would be used to spy on them, that their cameras would be accessed…
> more often than not
Any data on that? Because to me it sounds like “because they are sometimes true, we should assume they are always true”
But I’m open to data.
Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years
#648Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 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.
To be clear, I made no mention of the state or responsibility.
All I said was a statement of moral values: that all children deserve the best opportunity we as a species can provide for them.
There are many possible mechanisms and social institutions that can participate in that process. Parents are one, the state is another, but there are certainly many more.