RE: https://infosec.exchange/@david_chisnall/116160637051672728
the question you should be asking yourself is not “what's the best way to verify the age of every single computer user on earth”
but rather “why the fuck are we trying to verify the age of every single computer user on earth????”
and the answer to that is: fascism
stop. complying.
@nileane This forgets about the 20 year+ supply of older computers going all the way back to the Core 2 Duo that are good enough for what most people do with computers.
It's exactly the same as banning the manufacture of all new repeating firearms: nobody ever scraps a working pre-ban version again.
@LukefromDC This is kindof a false analogy. Firearms haven't meaningfully changed in 50 years or more.
A better analogy would be pre-emissions (or pre-airbags or whatever) cars: Yeah you can keep the old thing running, but parts become harder and harder to find, and the skills to maintain them become more obscure, and that new shiny do-dad (cruise control, lanekeeping, etc) is appealing to the 99% of non-enthusiasts.
With firearms, all the pre-ban owners were "enthusiats" already.
@notecharlie I ws thinking of the 1994 "assault weapon ban" that was repealed in 2004. It banned new production of mags holding more than ten rounds except for cops and military, but exempted existing magazines. The result was nobody ever junked a damaged "pre-ban" mag, and they sold for real money in print publications like Shotgun News and later online.
If you were younger than perhaps 10 or so in 2004 you may never have heard of this former law, sorry about that.
I think a simple photo quiz should do the trick.
Show pictures of:
A dial telephone with cord attached handset
A manual window crank
A manual can opener
if you can identify 2 out of 3 accurately, you are old enough to use the internet/social media.
@nileane We have millions of Epstein documents, pointing to a massive organization of "real" sex abusers, conducted by multi-billionaires who believe they are above the law, and California politicians are more concerned about locking down normie devices.
This law is a distraction from Epstein, and to all the victims that deserve actual justice. Prosecute the billionaires and distribute their wealth back to society so parents can be parents again.
@nileane Think of the children!
Meanwhile, in previous history:
9000BC-1950AD - drawn boobies
1951-1995 - forest porn, copied cassettes.
1995-present - internets
I'm not like, pro children seeing pornographic material. But at the same time, I don't think it will cause brain damage or whatever conservatives think will happen.
I mean, when I opened WinZip and accidentally found my stepdad's archive of pornographic material when I was 8... It didn't exactly turn me straight did it?
... I really hope she didn't actually stick that water hose up there...
@nileane That's a very reasonable technical solution to an otherwise unreasonable law that kids will be able to squirm their way out of in like, a week, tops.
You're right, why are we even having this discussion? It's propaganda designed to force the conversation into a limited space to make it easier to defend in spite of its obvious flaws.
The law (conveniently) doesn't outline any technical requirements. Did someone with technical experience even review it? Was it just one reviewer? Did they have a conflict of interest? It looks like it is vague, open to iterpretation, and by all accounts, modest. Maybe even, at first glance, reasonable. Inoccuous.
This leaves it wide open to last minute revisions or a more dramatic interpretation. Persona wouldn't need to do much to outbid any other solution providers to make themselves the gold standard by going above and beyond what the law requires on paper. A future "clarifying" revision could go much much harder and essentially make that the case. A little lobbying pressure wouldn't be out of the imagination.
And I mean, that's the best case scenario. It's a vague, low effort way to get the door open and the powers it provides to lawmakers would be trivial to expand once there's a precedent.
It's a pass from me. Legislate better. Make the tech bros pay taxes first.
@nileane If the "why" is not obvious, this civilization must relive its history in order to learn again.
When I see how authoritarian ideas, fascist movements, and the ease with which the media relay snippets of corruption without anyone batting an eye… I tell myself we're getting dangerously close to that point.
It's no longer naivety. It's pure and simple forgetfulness, and history never fails to remind us of that in such circumstances.
@nileane @david_chisnall 's statement is also wrong. The API exposes exact DoB for children if the API can be called daily as it would be for example with an app long installed on the device. On the day the value changes you know everything. In that sense the API is broken and a privacy fail.
Really it's about liability dumping. Social media companies want to do a cigarette company operation where their products are evil and addictive but it's magically okay as someone else checks you are 18.
@claudius @nileane Unless you are accessing the darknet over Tor/Freenet/whatever or mesh networking without even the telecoms much less the corporate servers invited.
No system locked to age verification will ever be allowed into my life except as a test subject to learn how to crack it and force access.
@claudius @nileane It is not impossible until they find a way to kill every darknet host globally, kill all of Tor globally, round up and destroy every pre-ban/unlocked computer, and by doing so shut down even mesh networking.
Then they find they also have to find a way to ban flash drives and camera cards, and after that, pen and paper and in-person conversations in places like canoes with no electrical system.
Right now everything peer to peer without a server is outside the reach of age verification regardless of the law. Making something illegal makes it risker, it does NOT make it impossible.
Otherwise there would be no drug use other than alcohol and tobacco, and nobody would have sex unless they were married and had never been divorced.
I've been defying unjust laws all my life, this won't be any different...
@LukefromDC @nileane Yeah, that's just fine. You want privacy only for yourself.
I would much rather prefer privacy for everyone.
Dude, seriously, what the fuck? I get that you're smart. You can defy anything. Very cool indeed. I would much rather not have that kind of society in the first place.
Should those who depend on computers also stop complying?
why is it that the people trying to prevent children/young people having educational freedom are the most likely to sexually abuse them?
Oh wait…..
Of course….
Anyone pushing this is very suspect, call child protection if they have kids!
Fooker
Niléane
LukefromDC
echarlie
Ember is so tired of people. 
PandaChronicle Resists
Cassandrich
🏴🏳⚧🏴☠
SuperDocteur
Dying World 🔥🌎🔥
AdventureTense
Robots can be gay deal with it
Arthfach 🐻
A.B. Murrow
Riley S. Faelan
Drew Pickard
DonCC
twelvemileroad
Batsify
Navi 
Doug 🌈🇨🇦 
Olivetree
Craig Reynolds
Grow Fediverse
Skylar Caulfield 
Orange Lantern 
The Penguin of Evil
Olivier Roux (moose)
Kirils Solovjovs
(^^)
Claudius
Nuwagaba Gift
Raven667
ChuffMeister