Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude is only available to people over 18 years

support.claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 620 posts

Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years

#321

Post by deaton »

miki123211 wrote: post #167
phyzix5761 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bank? So now you know what bank they use?

This is why you have a relay in the middle. Then, Chase knows you've verified your ID somewhere, the relay knows that some Chase user verified themselves at Pornhub, and Pornhub knows that the user is over 18, without knowing their identity or what bank they're using. You could also do this with ZKPs and device integrity protection. The latter is more secure but more complex, the former is much simpler and openness f…

Or we could use multiple relays so nobody knows both the bank and the purpose, or even who would know the other piece of data... and now thats just Tor but for identity verification. Might be a good idea actually, except the whole point is Anthropic wants to know who you are.

Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years

#322

Post by deaton »

win311fwg wrote: post #271
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Age verification is not (should not be) the same as ID verification / storage / etc; the US needs laws similar to EU ones where companies can only get the minimum required PII. In the case of age verification that's zero, or a boolean value "yes this person is over 18" that they get from a trusted party like a bank.

> from a trusted party like a bank. For what reason should I trust a bank?

I trust my bank a whole lot more than I trust Anthropic

Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years

#324

Post by Retro_Dev »

soltanov wrote: post #97

Everyone shares their all kinds of data with ai companies. Privacy is dead anyway

I have not, do not, and will continue to not allow my data to be used for AI training... Yet for some reason my blog website is still scraped by some AI data slurper every 10 seconds. If 99% of people don't care (or know) about their data being ingested, it doesn't justify the scraping, because there is still a (rightly infuriated) 1% who do care.

Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years

#326

Post by fnordpiglet »

Glad kids can’t learn how to use AI effectively at school! Would only want them on laundered accounts to cheat, rather than official school accounts to learn the tools for practical purposes. That would be a real shame.

My daughter’s school is working hard to make AI use a complementary aspect of learning, rather than adversarial. Like the calculator it can be used to accelerate learning once you’re past the basics and using it for practical automation and task purposes is not dissimilar to any other technical skill and is highly practical.

The knee jerk “no minors for stochastic parrot calculators” is absurd. And I’m no anarchist parenting style parent - we do parental controls and mirroring and limit / ban social media. We are more Orwellian than free range. But this is one step too far, too unthinking, too simplistic.

Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years

#327

Post by [deleted] »

f6v wrote: post #156
walrus01 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you'd told me 15 years ago that people would be running freely-distributed software originating from research labs in China on computers self-hosted in their own house as an alternative to authoritarian overreach and control by the US in internet-based services, I'd have told you that you were smoking some good reefer. The irony is that the authoritarian control hasn't gone away in China either, if anything it's e…

Wasn't writing on the wall when Aaron Swartz got prosecuted?

[deleted]

Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years

#328

Post by jachee »

throwaway323929 wrote: post #316
Valodim wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the companies and governments out of it. If you'd like to advocate for this position for a living, the tobacco, alcohol, and gambling industries will all be happy to pay you.

Kids do all of this stuff anyways, making it illegal doesn't stop it from happening. But we're not talking about a product that kills its users, we're talking about a polymath that can help its users build and create things. Are you intellectually prepared to believe that Claude Code is as dangerous as cigarettes, a product that kills 50% of its users? Do you genuinely believe, as a core belief, that Claude Code will…

> we're not talking about a product that kills its users

Yeah, it just pushes the ones with the tendency to do it themselves.

Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years

#329

Post by jawilson2 »

reaperducer wrote: post #91
throwaw12 wrote: post #15

Good that we have Chinese models now, we can host anywhere and use as much as we like without age verification. Also, what's the reason banning minors? Is AI bad for mental health? If so, should companies also ban them to prevent burnout of their employees?

what's the reason banning minors? Is AI bad for mental health? I simply don't understand how you can ask that question unless you fall into one of these categories: 1. You live in a place with no access to any news source whatsoever. No newspapers. No television. No radio. No internet. 2. You're a child under the age of six. 3. You're an LLM. Every day or two there is another story posted on HN about the harmful effe…

Every day there is another story about the harmful effects of AI on literally everything, including mental health, IP theft, the climate, etc. "Think of the children" is and always has been a weak excuse.

Re: Claude is only available to people over 18 years

#330

Post by hatsix »

nish__ wrote: post #242
newswasboring wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The need is not in question, the solution is. This annoying glaze machine is not it for mental health tasks.

Most people have friends and family to "glaze" them anyway. I don't see it as a major danger. Also, it's gotten better with the glazing lately anyway.

The danger is in the replacement. Confiding in others builds a web of trust. Talking about a break-up with a friend builds a relationship, and the next time that friend needs someone, they know you're an option. It's economics, borrowing and trading emotional support. AI as confidant destroys that economy.
Post reply on HN