I can very much imagine giving a lecture, in a few years time, and students will ask, disbelievingly,
"What do you mean that you could just run a website from a computer in your home? For anyone in the world to access?"
or
"No, I don't believe it - you could run a server to exchange messages with other people, without a licence, and without verifying who they are?!"
or
"What do you mean that you fell in love with your wife without knowing her real name, because you chatted to her so much on the web before you ever met?! Surely you scanned her ID when you first started talking to her."
@neil ha, met spouse in analog space in a group that had essentially used IRC nicks long before IRC was created
Names that might appear on a government document were irrelevant and confusing if someone accidentally used one
I'm willing to bet we're already there.
@neil so, how is "online" defined? Could this be the big moment for BBSs to make a return? Or perhaps adhoc mesh networks?
I personally would be willing to make a commitment to relinquish all digital technology if there is ever a requirement to prove identity. Perhaps we could make it a movement? Anyone else want to join?
@neil In their dreams? Itβs one fell swoop.
In reality? I suspect thatβs at least somewhat up to us depending on how readily we enable themβ¦
I sincerely believe doing that would be better than all the other approaches to age verification that people have suggested.
But crucially it must be implemented in such a way that sending packets without that field is interpreted as no blocking needed because itβs either adults communicating or has already been vetted by an adult as being safe for children.
It could be done by defining a new destination option to indicate that the sender of that packet is a minor. Sites with content thatβs not safe for children can refuse to service requests with that option. And parents can configure their CPE device to not let their children communicate without the option being present.
Doing it this way would avoid the privacy invasion from collecting identification of every user regardless of their age.
One important thing to look for in a proposal to βprotect the childrenβ is what impact it has on scenarios where no children are involved. If a proposal to βprotect the childrenβ requires changes in how adults are allowed to communicate, then it was never about protecting the children in the first place.
Won't happen
Because somewhere in the middle or even before I am willing to bet enough people will crash out and turn to urban terrorism well before bowing down to a north korean like internet
I'm starting to think of just binning all of my electronics and just worrying about my carbs on my bike instead of this shit.
Seems like 10 seconds.
@neil It gets to that point faster the less people in real life care and just tolerate that shit.
I don't like it, good to see people here on Mastodon and those who care about their privacy don't like it, but what we should worry about is the people out there in real life trying to live normal lives.
Maybe they're aware, know the implication, the consequence, or maybe they aren't, but do they really care is I think the real question...
Idk, I'm just spitballing here haha, but it sucks..