this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
92 points (81.5% liked)

Ask Lemmy

38489 readers
1399 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for privacy. But between setting up the birthdate when creating my children's local account on their computers, and having to send a copy of their ID to every platform under the sun, I'd easily chose the former.

I'd even agree to a simple protocol (HTTP X-Over-18 / X-Over-21 headers?) to that.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Lots of the criticisms will eventually start sounding like seatbelt law opponents. Lots of “it should be optional, if you want to do it that’s fine but don’t force me to, I feel safer without it, it’s each individual’s responsibility and shouldn’t be mandated, etc” types of arguments.

The problem with the current implementation is that it isn’t done privately. There are several ways to do secure and private age verifications, where your device never passes your browsing history off to the government, and the individual sites never get your personal info. But lawmakers have been lobbied by companies who want to insert themselves as the age verifiers to skim your data. So the current laws being passed are written in such a way that they’ll result in massive privacy violations.

If opponents truly wanted to prevent privacy violations, they would be devising ways to get lawmakers on board with secure age verification. That way the laws would actually reflect best practices, and wouldn’t just result in less privacy. But they’re still trapped in the knee jerk “but my privacy” reactions, which shuts down any further discussion and leaves the door wide open for lobbyists to write and pass whatever legislation they want.

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Well written, but I disagree, because "get out of my backyard". It is clear as day that the goal of this legislation is not taking care of children, helping parents or anything else worthwhile. So nah, in a well-functioning society this would be immediately put down with "get the fuck out with this hypocrisy" note

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

It's not just a privacy issue. Regulatory capture is a problem too. It encumbers small services to the point where they can't afford to exist, and the only winners are the walled gardens. And it's also logistically an impossible thing to attempt to regulate at scale.

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

That isn't a problem with proper implementation. Not that it will be done properly, just that it can be done properly

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 2 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Trying to get every site that offers mixed content, or could do so to implement recognition of all of this is herding cats. It's completely impossible without a walled internet. Moreover, there's just no way a OS asking if you're 18 is going to be accepted. It just isn't. The expectation will be that they verify your age properly.

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The goal isnt to herd every single cat. Just get the bulk of them. That's how existing age regulation works. Alcohol age limit doesn't stop underage drinking, but it does substantially reduce it. With that in mind, there are privacy respecting solutions that will do what needs to be done

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I doubt you would even get "the bulk of them". Again, people are saying "it's just a yes/no tickbox bro". For now. You cannot be naive enough to think it won't change. And the absurdity of it too. Forcing something someone may program for fun to have a specific feature.

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I do expect it to change. I expect it to be standardized with zero knowledge proofs. If I am avle to communicate with you on a random internet forum from anywhere in the world using standardized protocols, we can get private and secure "I am 18+" verification. It may initially start with proving it in some form or another, but if done correctly you would essentialy have a private key that certifies you are over X age. The company would know nothing about you, other than you are not a child. I have extremely simplified it, but it is possible.

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Many OS here aren't made by companies. They can all easily just be forked and edited to immediately wave people through any hypothetical age checks, moreover any website could just ignore it and wave everyone through.

[–] Trilogy3452@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Are we sure parental control methods were proven to be fundamentally inadequate for the situation? There's no bulletproof security method to guard this data, so the discussion is about weighing privacy loss vs child safety, against existing methods (or improving other methods). Also the choice to set the age is in the hands of the parent, so I don't see the benefit besides enabling the kid to choose app in a more self served manner (which you probably don't want to allow).

Seatbelts are there because it's obvious you're not in control of other drivers, even if your car has all the safety controls. The downsides are minuscule in comparison to the privacy discussion, in my opinion.

[–] PokerChips@programming.dev 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

This is highjacking the narrative

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Is it though? I’ve been saying for a while that direct device verification is the way to go. It would allow for systems that maintain privacy, while also allowing lawmakers to say they’re protecting kids (and enabling parental controls by default, which is important when many are basically tech illiterate). But that wouldn’t help the big tech companies harvest your data, which is why they haven’t lobbied for it. Instead, lawmakers have been pushing the worst form of age verification, which requires all kinds of privacy violations every time you want to jork it.

[–] PokerChips@programming.dev 1 points 16 hours ago

If lawmakers feel like they need to say their protecting the kids and this is their answer, then we know they're phony.