181–190 of 193 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This should work the other way: a website must send a header that the content in the response is safe for those under 18. If there is no header, the browser doesn't display the page. It is easy to implement and there is no need to change existing websites for this.
That would make all older web content become inaccessible
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is the correct way too. Some of the age verification systems that use digital ids (mDLs) do the same thing but people freak out about how they work because I think they misunderstand the tech. They system basically asks the mDL via an api call "is this user above the age of 18/21" and the app only responds with a yes or no. It doesn't pass the users fulls details over or anything like that.
Do these systems prevent linkability or allow the use of pseudonyms? As in, if I repeatedly ask for age verification to the same service, does it know: 1) the identity of the user making the request, and 2) whether repeated requests comes from the same user (even if they don't know who it is?)
The age verification bills in the US at least also make it illegal to record that information, sometimes with high penalties (e.g. my reading of Texas's is that it is up to $10k per retained record).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes? I expect that "take a weekend to France to bypass age verification" and "subscribe to NordVPN to bypass age verification" are both legal while "take a weekend to France to see the Eiffel tower" and "use NordVPN to increase your security" are both legal. Did you never wonder why VPN ads don't really list any actual use cases, yet they're wildly popular? If you know what you need it for, the ad doesn't have to tel…
VPN ads do list actual use cases. The most popular one I've heard is geolocation-based pricing on airline tickets. (I still don't really know what people are actually using VPNs for.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hear you. I really do. I like the idea of a way of verifying who you are (in that you’re a real person) and age (so you could prove ability to do 18/21+ things). I see no reason why random companies/etc would need to know gender identity, name, etc. None of that is relevant to buying alcohol. If they need something, e.g. name on a mortgage, then maybe it’s optionally provided, under my control. I don’t know. I’m no…
I mean, honestly, there's a good question to be had: why do we even need gender on a modern ID? Assuming a reasonably up-to-date photo, there isn't even a whole lot of purpose in listing descriptive information about the person. And that's before we talk about other stuff that you could list instead or encode as data into a smart ID if you really want some descriptive data. Unfortunately, I agree with you that while…
You’re right too. Even suggesting that would be political suicide.
> government passes law that requires companies to age verify users > said government provides no way to actually verify a human's age > hilarity ensues
Everyone that have worked on passwordless authentication is ultimately responsible for this death of internet anonymity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been hired and have hired people through the Discord community. It's no different than Hacker News in this respect, where I've done the same. Professionalism is orthogonal, though I will agree that ephemeral chats have serious drawbacks for project-oriented communities.
You can read HN without an account, and making an account doesn't require providing a phone number. (Discord in some cases locks you out of an account entirely if it thinks that you are "suspicious" until you provide a one-time sms code from a phone # that satisfies them)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing I've noticed is that when I post something here I know for a fact but that isn't common wisdom, nobody believes me. > You are mistaken. DRM can work in a variety of ways but that is absolutely one of them. Of course it can work that way. It's software, you can write whatever you want. It doesn't though. If you prefer, they have chosen to believe this is what the law says because it's a good argument if some…
> One thing I've noticed is that when I post something here I know for a fact but that isn't common wisdom, nobody believes me. No, you're just wrong. > It doesn't though It does on Android. hardware-backed safetynet attestation can be required, as a mater of policy. Many things do not require it though, for aforementioned reasons. See https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts... "MEETS_DEVICE_INTE…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do these systems prevent linkability or allow the use of pseudonyms? As in, if I repeatedly ask for age verification to the same service, does it know: 1) the identity of the user making the request, and 2) whether repeated requests comes from the same user (even if they don't know who it is?)
My non-expert understanding is that in the short term mDL is linkable to a cert serial, but those are supposed to be regularly rotated. So you might have 2) for a day or whatever the rotation period is. I think I've seen it asserted that it is possible to have a ZKP framework that doesn't require this, but I don't know how that might work. The age verification bills in the US at least also make it illegal to record t…
There's a bunch of ways to achieve this privately. The work of Jan Camenisch on Anonymous Credentials and other things was done quite a long time ago now. It's a well studied field.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I miss the days of forums, and wish something like them could thrive again instead of rather private, but importantly ephemeral chats. Open source projects have long had ephemeral chats, private to the people in the chat at that moment - it just used to be called IRC.
Except there were open, archival solutions for IRC for projects to take advantage of. Are there any for Discord?