People are worried about tech companies collecting data on minors, so they ban tech companies from collecting data on minors. Tech companies rally behind "Age Verification" laws so they can collect data on minors again under the guise of protecting minors. The people who don't understand why that's a bad thing count it as a win and we're right back where we started.
Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
151–160 of 209 posts
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I did that to my 13yrs old, she would not know about when her friends are organizing to meet up. Simple as that. They usually agree on going to visit one of them or local center in chat group. And since they are young, it is all spontaneous "lets go now" kind of thing. A kid that cant use a phone will sit home alone while others meet up. And I am actually glad my 13 years old has friend group she does in person th…
If only there were some way to use a phone to contact people, without going through a social media platform.
1.) What is the exact way to contact people via phone if those people do not have phone?
2.) And yes, organization among 12 years old means that someone writes "lets do X" and other write back "cool". Those available show up. Those not available sometimes talk back and negotiate different time.
3.) If 5 12-16 years old kids organize in a group chat, not being on that chat means missing out spontaneously organized actions. Even if they are unusually serious and recall to call your parents instead of just jumping into action, you are not there to have input into agreements. So, the meetup will be when you are not available and it will be too late for you.
4.) And yes, even among adults, if others have to jump through special hoops to join you specifically whereas everyone else does not have such requirement ... you will miss out.
Yes, 12-14 years old act on impulse and organized spontaneously without creating org chart around it. That means forgetting to do extra steps so that people not being in chat even know what you are about to do.
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the browsers would need to reject the sites unconditionally since no one is going to enable parental controls if it breaks everything. Otherwise I expect the current situation of parental controls not working and thus everyone avoiding them and complaining would continue. Recall that this is exactly what happened with TLS. When browsers started gating all new features behind TLS being active suddenly all the main…
Sounds good to me. Why didn't Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, and the porn industry do this 15 years ago? Why did they pretend to have no responsibility for the content they were publishing? Why did they think clicking "Yes" on an "I am 18 years of age" popup was sufficient?
> Why did they think clicking "Yes" on an "I am 18 years of age" popup was sufficient?
Because that is the only acceptable solution and it doesn't violate user privacy. Other than off-by-default parental controls that are optionally enabled.
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
I own a $60,000 dollar car that's insured, still doesn't mean I'm going to just let anyone use it when I depend on it.
I would assume that you cannot merely walk in to the nearest Apple car store and get a new car the same day if something bad happened to your car , so I don't really understand your statement as there is no equivalency here to exploit in your analogy.
I mean, you can go get a new car the same day, hence rental places while insurance figures everything out.
How about this, I'll pick a random day in your future while you're out doing stuff to show up and break your phone in half. How much is that going to ruin your day?
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Parents need to weigh potential otracization against the cost of giving a smart device, which could be as high as ending their normal childhood development. Personally I think no phones until 16 is a good rule.
Easier to say. Your child will just despise you for willingly making their school life hell.
I went through high school until almost 16 with no phone whatsoever. Twas fine. I remember peers around me for the most part had smartphones at the start of high school, maybe even some in middle school? I don't want to say exactly when this was for privacy, but I don't see why phoneless school living could be so disastrous. But then, I am a bit of an oddball and introvert.
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're citing Fight the New Drug, a Mormon anti-porn organization whose angle was to define pornography as an addiction to justify laws banning it as a health crisis. My point is, they operate openly and can be held accountable, as lawsuits demonstrate. The alternative to this sort of site is the Dark Web, where nobody is held accountable and the law is broken with impunity. Pornhub is by far the lesser of two evils…
One of my 5 sources is from Fight the New Drug and you turn to an ad hominem because I guess Mormons can't make good arguments and it's ridiculous to say that people can be addicted to porn. Sounds like you're in denial of that for yourself. We don't have to choose between two evils. If adults want to watch porn they need to prove they're an adult. You wouldn't say we should stop age verifying people for online gambl…
My point is that if we make adults sites harder for adults to access, many people will turn to the unregulated black market, which is much worse. It's much closer than people think: once VPNs are banned or restricted, the next easiest circumvention solution is Tor. We don't need age verification per-site when we have client-side parental controls, which are widely trusted by parents.
Gambling is a system which inherently requires payment, for which it is easy to request a credit card as proof of age. It's also necessary to create an account to track your winnings. For adult content, the main business model is the free ad-supported system with account registration optional. ID verification systems charge about thirty cents per user, which takes a lot of ad views to recoup, so to avoid verification cost on every visit the user must create an account (which is subject to account sharing anyway, and as the article notes, verified accounts are being sold on the black market). Parental controls client-side make much more sense unless your actual goal is to harm the adult industry and increase government surveillance of citizens.
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
The generations of parents who came up with the original bridge hypothetical also worked to have the government ban alcohol and cigarette sales to minors.
You can order cigars, loose tobacco and rolling papers, and wine straight to your house without any ID check, all completely legal. I did it as a minor and you can still do it today (well today you can also add "CBD" on to that list). The truth is there is no meaningful controls on teenage minors getting access to tobacco and alcohol. The limitations used are just window dressing for Karen to pretend like the governm…
They should (and frequently do) require ID for delivery. The postal carrier will literally check ID before delivering the package. It costs about $8 extra. Any company that’s not using these services is exposed to some dire consequences if/when ATF comes knocking.
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of my 5 sources is from Fight the New Drug and you turn to an ad hominem because I guess Mormons can't make good arguments and it's ridiculous to say that people can be addicted to porn. Sounds like you're in denial of that for yourself. We don't have to choose between two evils. If adults want to watch porn they need to prove they're an adult. You wouldn't say we should stop age verifying people for online gambl…
Until there is zero societal stigma towards sex and legal sexual preferences, mandatory age verification for adult content is completely unacceptable. Mandatory age verification for adult content should be illegal.
Quite. The age verification for social media may actually be worse, because the age requirement is lower, meaning they have to collect personally identifying information on minors. Many young people also don't have ID, particularly in the UK where driving is less common. Actually, many adults don't have ID in general. Every free vBulletin form also just got thirty cents per user more expensive to run.
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, this I will seriously never understand. When I was a kid, if my mother didn't want me doing something then she would make sure I couldn't do it. Is nobody parenting their children anymore? Do they just let them do whatever they want these days? I've got a 2 year old of my own and can't imagine just handing him an iPad and ignoring him all day like I see other parents do. I can't tell if it's laziness, or ignora…
My 7 year old came home crying the other day because every single person in her class has a phone except her. I can't imagine taking it away from my older kids (14,11). They use it to chat with friends and play games with them, do homework together, make plans and share common experiences and videos. It's not as simple as you think. You have no idea how shitty screentime is how much of a cat and mouse game it is. It'…
I'm reminded of a statistic I read. 75% of the time you will spend with your child happens by age 12. I think I would eschew the phones until 13, purely because I'd never get that time back. Once they're adolecents and "too cool" to hang out with parents anymore, then fine, here's your phone, don't kill yourself.
Anyway, let's not assume everyone is a parent and ruin the whole online world with rules to "protect the children" made by the same people that never arrested any Epstein clients. We know they're not doing it to protect children. Let's not even pretend they are.
Re: Age verification tech could put children at greater risk, says think tank
#160"with nine out of 10 parents saying they are in favour of a ban in response to a government consultation" I wonder why those 90% of parents don't cut their children off from social media right now. They have the power to do it.
Are you a parent?