[dead]
Online age verification is the hill to die on
91–100 of 750 posts
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#92Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#93> If you love your family, you must stop online age verification. > If you want the best for your children, you must stop online age verification. > Your children are being targeted. The infrastructure being built under the cover of child safety is designed to enslave them for the rest of their lives. Jumped the shark on that one, and really off-color. I'm less inclined to listen to guy, not because of his actual poi…
Maybe you're not the target, then.
I haven't heard too many people say these extreme-sounding, yet at least arguably true points out loud.
Someone should be saying them, and the fact that it's not your particular cup of tea may not be the biggest issue here.
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#94Age verification on Australian social media has loopholes. Underage influencers use an agency to manage their social media for them. So anyone with enough followers or money can continue using social media under the age of 16. If you are going to implement age controls, you should implement a ban on underage influencers as well.
How could one protect the, call it one in 1 million… the speech of the (young) Greta Thunbergs, for example?
I bet there is a 15 year-old much smarter than me making political videos and I wouldn’t necessarily want them to be forced to stop. What if they’re on my “team”! ;) (I kid)
Recalling how we had lots of political debates in high school: if some of those kids made videos and got really popular, and the law made them stop, they would have been incentivized to vote $responsibleParty out.
(Socials bad for kids though maybe they could selfhost their monologues instead)
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#95Age verification can be achieved without destroying anonymity and privacy online using anonymous credential systems, but it has to be designed that way from the ground up, and no one pushing age verification is interested in preserving privacy.
This comes up in every thread, but the purpose of the laws is not to verify that someone can access an anonymous token. If we had a true anonymous token system then everyone would just share tokens around.
The real world analog would be if you could buy beer at the store with anyone's ID because they didn't make any effort to reasonably check that the ID was yours or discourage people from sharing or copying IDs.
The systems enforce identity checking because that's the only way age verification can be done without having some reason to discourage or detect credential sharing.
The retort that follows is always "Well it's not perfect. Nothing is perfect." The trap is convincing ourselves that a severely imperfect system would be accepted. What would really happen is that it would be the trojan horse to get everyone on board with age verification, then the laws would be changed to make them more strict.
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
looks like you ruffled some feathers with this one
Yeah, calling people "dogs" for pointing out that TFA is a hyperbolic (AI-written) screed without substance would ruffle some feathers. Edit: yes it is hyperbolic and ridiculous to suggest people will be "enslaved" because they don't have access to the internet. Do you realize that makes everybody who grew up in the 90s or earlier a "slave"?
Nothing "hyperbolic" about the points made. If anything it's not nearly extreme enough. People have no idea how bad things really are.
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I read those seemingly outrageous claims, I didn't immediately dismiss the author. I allowed him to substantiate the claims and kept reading. I found myself agreeing with his argument and his train of thought of how, once digital IDs are accepted as a norm, they won't be unwound, and all online activity will likely require them and then, as he says, "Your children will never know what it was like to think freely…
Nah that’s silly, because Google has been doing all that already for the past quarter century. This “age verification” shit isn’t going to move the needle on the Google-created dystopia we already have. The time to worry about not having a digital cage was quite awhile ago. Instead tech people pushed Chrome and Android and Gmail and ads onto us.
Is Google tracking which teenagers make which posts on 4chan?
Curious about via Google Chrome versus not
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#98Age verification can be achieved without destroying anonymity and privacy online using anonymous credential systems, but it has to be designed that way from the ground up, and no one pushing age verification is interested in preserving privacy.
AFAIK there are designs in the EU that respect privacy. There is a range of options being pushed around the world, and theres definitely a few of them which are more technically defensible than others.
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#99Age verification can be achieved without destroying anonymity and privacy online using anonymous credential systems, but it has to be designed that way from the ground up, and no one pushing age verification is interested in preserving privacy.
This comes up in every thread, but the purpose of the laws is not to verify that someone can access an anonymous token. If we had a true anonymous token system then everyone would just share tokens around. The real world analog would be if you could buy beer at the store with anyone's ID because they didn't make any effort to reasonably check that the ID was yours or discourage people from sharing or copying IDs. The…
Make it a duplication resistant hardware token that you can get for free then. The stakes just aren't high enough to worry about these kinds of edge cases.
Re: Online age verification is the hill to die on
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
"prepper" is not an identity. I looked up this guy, he has crazy takes he's free to change at any time (so not an "identity" in any way) and id rather not read him.
"right wing" is considered politics that people identify others in. > free to change at any time (so not an "identity" in any way) I'm free to change my name at any time, is my name not considered a part of my identity?
Right wing is not an identity either. Don't mess around with terms you don't understand. Do some research.
> I'm free to change my name at any time, is my name not considered a part of my identity?
You can change your name to conceal elements of your identity just like you could wear clothes that cover your skin color. So sure, you can hide elements of your identity but changing your name won't change your family history or ethnicity.
Growing up in a Republican family might be an identity but producing lots of blogs, videos, and commercial products within the right wing prepper lifestyle is not an identity. Just do a little research thanks