Online age verification is the hill to die on
141–150 of 750 posts
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#142Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#143It is easy to defend on the motte hill (protection of children, protection against abuse and heinous crimes), and easy to expand and farm on the bailey (universal surveillance, mass data collection, and the erosion of privacy).
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#144Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
This type of system is a horrible idea for the following reasons: 1) the cards can just be re-sold which creates a black market and defeats the "cashier physically saw the person buying the card" angle 2) nickle and dimes people for simply browsing the internet (verification can dystopia anyone?) 3) related to #2, it creates winners in the private sector since presumably you need central authorities handing out these…
Is it even theoretically possible to have bearer anonymity and no reselling option at the same time?
I imagine this could be done with appropriate zero-knowledge measures so that the combination of Alice's age token and Bob's private key creates a capability to exercise the option, but without the service (e.g. a social media site) knowing that the token belongs to Alice, and without the ID provider (e.g. the state) knowing that Bob was the one who exercised it.
While honest customers have no reason to make use of this option, if Alice blindly sells her tokens to anybody willing to pay, there's bound to be some trolls out there who will do it just for the laughs.
This is far from a perfect system since a dishonest site could also make use of the option. But it theoretically works without revealing anybody's identity (unless the option is used, and then only if the service and the ID provider collude).
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
If everyone is complaining about the smell of shit, maybe it's because there's shit everywhere.
It's more likely that they're just virtue signaling about {{current-controversial-thing}}, as evidenced by the fact that they often accuse content of being AI generated when it would only appear that way to the most naive readers.
> Virtue signalling is a pejorative neologism for the expression of a moral viewpoint with the intent of communicating good character, frequently used to suggest hypocrisy.
What virtue am I signalling and what hypocrisy am I trying to hide?
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#147Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#148The one and only method I will participate in is server operators setting a RTA header [1] for URL's that may contain adult or user-generated or user-contributed content and the clients having the option to detect that header and trigger parental controls if they are enabled by the device owner. That should suffice to protect most small children. Teens will always get around anything anyone implements as they are alr…
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#149Saw it with the UK laws. It just gets rammed through. Whether it’s ignorance, malice, hidden force, a desire for surveillance state, genuine concern for children - doesn’t matter, the forces in favour are substantially more and seemingly motivated to try over and over until it sticks.
Much like brexit or for that matter trump reelection I just don’t have much faith in wisdom of the democratic collective consensus anymore and I don’t think it’ll get any better in an AI misinformation echo chamber world. Onwards into dystopia
Exceeding gloomy take I know
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#150Very unpopular opinion here on HN: one can't stop it without direct physical action against those who push it.