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

US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 369 posts

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#61

Post by Nasrudith »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #13

The breathless fearmongering over an age field on account set up is just completely over-the-top. This is probably the least bad out of all possible ways to implement age checking. The benefit of this is that it can short-circuit support for more onerous age verification. The writing has been on the wall for some time now: the era of completely unrestricted internet is coming to an end. The question is how awful will…

No, derangement is declaring "The writing has been on the wall for some time now: the era of completely unrestricted internet is coming to an end." without fighting it at all and just mindlessly accepting it because you were told it was going to happen.

It should be really easy to get your bank account information then. You're just going to give it to me, right? What is this? You're fighting me tooth and nail instead of celebrating giving me your banking info?

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#62

Post by yabutlivnWoods »

politelemon wrote: post #56
yabutlivnWoods wrote: post #17

Tim Apple argued it was a violation of their engineers and managers free speech to make them engineer back doors Wonder if they will stand up against this on the same grounds https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

I am continuously amazed by HN's ability to engage in apple pedestalism and ignoring everything else that goes against it. They've already been pushing age verification out in several countries.

What pedestal did I put Apple on by highlighting past behavior? Oh right I didn't. You're just inferring incorrectly. Another HN specialty.

Other countries are not the US, btw. There are groups here ready to challenge such a move.

Continually amazed at HN ignorance of geography.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#63

Post by bayindirh »

ButlerianJihad wrote: post #47
bloppe wrote: post #40

> The term “operating system” means software that supports the basic functions of a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. > The term “operating system provider” means a person that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. So excited to see the GNU vs. Linux debate finally land in court.

[flagged]

Long live Linux!

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#66

Post by Frieren »

yborg wrote: post #31
progval wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that help Facebook? They already have plenty of signals to guess their users' age, what would they do with an other one? They are not going to ban children anyway.

It helps them by making it somebody else's responsibility to get it right and thus shields them from liability.

The OS should start labeling everybody as a child by default. Forbid Facebook to show ads and any harming content by default. The OS has little less to lose with this approach than FB.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#67

Post by ButlerianJihad »

Random_BSD_Geek wrote: post #44
qazwsxedchac wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Short answer: No. Apple already caved in advance. Longer answer: In the UK, Apple already implements age "verification" at the OS level, starting with IOS/IPadOS 26.4. If Apple had not implemented this, it would still be in compliance with UK law. Apple is anticipatorily obedient. A company like Apple has visibility of the legislative pipeline in its markets. Looks like the UK was a test bed. Lots of OECD countries,…

> abolishing anonymity on the Internet. This is what Facebook wants.

> abolishing anonymity on the Internet.

Firstly, you keep using that word; I do not think it means what you think it means.

On the Internet, especially forums such as HN, you are "pseudonymous". That is, you made up a name for yourself, and that's how you're known to others. At the very least, we are all identified by IP addresses, which are again, fairly stable and unique pseudonyms. There are nearly zero truly anonymous corners of the Internet, because anonymous communications are chaotic and anarchic.

Secondly, it was the NSF who mandated that everyone accessing the Internet must have an associated and authenticated account with an identity that is known to their provider. These rules went into effect in the early 1990s. Perhaps they have been discarded or observed only in the breach, but truly, nobody is a stranger on the Internet. Even if nobody knows you're not a dog, your ISP or your coffeehouse still know who you are, when you connected, what device and so forth.

So, please let us stop pretending there is "anonymity" here, or that there ever has been. Whatever you've done in the past, it will eventually be unmasked. Yes, people on Discord and Wikipedia alike are freaking out over this prospect, but it was always going to happen. We've been laying down a very permanent record for over 50 years. Eventually it will all be correlated with real identities, Facebook or not.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#68

Post by kotaKat »

Glad to see that Elise Stefanik came out of fucking hiding in NY-21 to dump this stupid "parents decide" bill on us when she couldn't even be assed to help her constituents over the past several months when one of the main hospitals in her district is bankrupt and closing.

Last time we saw her anywhere near here was her "farewell tour" when she was supposed to go be Trump's UN stooge. Haven't seen her up here since.

Glad to know we get to die up here for on-device age verification for everyone else.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#69

Post by GuestFAUniverse »

skybrian wrote: post #27
Dwedit wrote: post #8

People lend phones or computers to kids. The age associated with the user account means absolutely nothing.

Identify devices, not people. Distinguishing between child-locked and unlocked devices is something any website should be able to do easily. Adult-only should be a config setting. Vendors shouldn't sell unlocked devices to kids. Then it's up to parents take sure their kids only have locked devices. (Or not, if they're okay with it.)

What for? I use family link for my kids devices. It works good enough. Everything else seems way too intrusive.

Apple is horrible in this regard. Their solutions never really work.

A joint venture for an (optional) cross-platform family app would be more than enough. This, plus a (voluntary) content rating that's offered via an API (could even be simple meta data on a webpage). Done.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#70

Post by pelasaco »

AnIrishDuck wrote: post #20

[flagged]

I have a kid. Actually two kids. They have their usage controlled by google family. I review weekly their internet usage, screen time is limited to 2 hours/day. They dont have social media. School research and etc, they do at home, in the "main computer" in our dinning room. Youtube too. In the end is our responsibility to educate and protect our kids. I truly dont see a need for such extra controls if the parents aren't interested in enforcing it.
Post reply on HN