201–210 of 302 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't correct. With ZKP-based systems even the CA can't track you. That's the "zero-knowledge" part.
but how is that possible? that even the CA cannot track you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But if they reveal nothing, isn't it wide open for abuse? Couldn't one over-18-person's proof become everyone's proof, because they can't tell it's the same proof, and the issuer can't tell where or how often the proof is being used? Yep! This is why the concept of zero knowledge age gating is such a trap for technically minded people. They imagine receiving a private cryptographic object that can be used to anonym…
From my limited knowledge of ZKP I believe there are protocols that don't allow token reuse, i.e., once you consume a token for one round, you cannot reuse it for another attestation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But if they reveal nothing, isn't it wide open for abuse? Couldn't one over-18-person's proof become everyone's proof, because they can't tell it's the same proof, and the issuer can't tell where or how often the proof is being used? Yep! This is why the concept of zero knowledge age gating is such a trap for technically minded people. They imagine receiving a private cryptographic object that can be used to anonym…
There are a variety of schemes possible that do not have these flaws. There's an interesting post here which goes into some of this - https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2026/03/02/anonymou... So - > Yep! Actually nope.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, a lot of it involves denigrating women and an entitled and very rigid attitude towards the male place in society (alphas etc). This is incredibly toxic for young men growing up and the women they interact with. Some of the more prominent proponents are actual pimps (the Tate brothers).
How is that different than pervasive pornography though? Many young boys now think it’s normal to ask girls for sexual acts before having ever kissed a girl.
Pornography may give some people some wrong ideas about sex and romantic relationships, might even instill some level of implicit misoginy in certain straight men, but I'm pretty sure you won't get the idea that women should be allowed in Parliament from watching too much porn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe? "Identity-based activist communities" are incredibly toxic as a rule. Maybe there's lasting harm from engaging in them early. Or maybe it's better to get exposed to them early in your life, so that you have time to figure out why you don't want anything to do with them. Either way, it seems pretty clear that preventing children and teens from engaging them is a nonstarter. You can't get anywhere close to conse…
I think it is safe to rule out early engagement as a positive factor.
Still, I don't want to gate people based on age. Parents should at least be able to overwrite the age of their child, maybe selectively allow bypasses. My experience with a computer would have been completely different if I was blocked from half of the internet. Especially when I see which kind of content gets blocked.
As a millennial-aged person I saw a fair amount of content I would not want the young people in my life to see, but it's probably not nearly as harmful as the non-age gated content that they will still have access to. There is a lot creepy youtube and tiktok content that isn't off limits but still unhealthy and my younger relatives are fascinated by it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google has pioneered a few technologies where they are the trusted dealer. For example, Private State Tokens. I have written a paper on how to do age verification in a completely privacy-preserving way, and it doesn’t even need zero-knowledge proofs: https://magarshak.com/papers/Personal.pdf
How about not needing to do age verification?
I'm talking about complying with laws, in a privacy-preserving way. It's possible.
Here, I posted it on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48760492
I just posted a general solution anyone can implement without needing Google as the trusted dealer: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48760492
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's where the mass shooters evidently come from. I mean, quite a few have come from proto-manosphere circles, too. Elliot Rodger comes to mind.
Given how large it is, I don't think it's a high stat. Especially compared with other subcultures. And we don't blame feminism for every instance where a man is killed by a man hating woman.
The fact that this is basically unheard of, while incels shooting up schools is somewhat common, may explain why blame is often thrown at one movement and not the other.