@david_chisnall And then another state or country passes a law that requires four age ranges, or another one that requires two, but they do not map nicely to the three CA requires.

You have now replicated another timezone mess.

@pemensik nope. Parents are welcome to manage their children. “It should require” remains a specious claim.

@Arcaik @lerxst @david_chisnall

@cascheranno @pemensik @Arcaik @lerxst

I don't have a problem with laws that say 'organisations interacting with children without parents present must provide tools that allow parental control'. There are lots of laws like this outside of the Internet context.

I do have a problem with laws that say 'you must give up privacy because OMG think of the children!'.

@david_chisnall @pemensik @Arcaik @lerxst there are vastly *more* circumstances without age checks. Between me and midday, I shall interact with coffee, appliances, vehicles, racks of hazardous materials, strangers, countless forms of media, high places I can fall from, low or confined places I can fall into, etc. None need or deserve digital nanny laws. If I take a walk three blocks in a city and into a park, or walk any half mile outside of cities, the breadth of risks soars.

See? This new reg category is Specious.

It also leaps toward a substantial imposition on other (legal) activity with scant need and questionable effectiveness.

As for “organizations”: The bulk of those hazards aren’t interactions with Organizations. It seems an artificial term given how we interact with our world, selected because it gives this misguided concept someone who’ll bear assignment of responsibility.

I’ve lived thru nanny tech initiatives, think-of-the-children lobbying, needed-to-fight-terrirism bills, etc. Through wiretap adaptations, DHS, Clipper chip and putting warning labels on adult stuff. The scary thing is the reg, not unfettered existence. Facial recognition and captured surveillance data, not ‘kid might get root’.

Flip the script and imagine use cases where you deserve to decide but are blocked. An abusive parent. Oppressive leaders (church or state or school).

Also, recall times you ‘colored outside of the lines’ in your learning, saw stuff not yet age appropriate, and (a) didn’t suffer or (b) learned adult lessons like safety or to recognize warning signs.

@david_chisnall @pemensik @Arcaik @lerxst

@pemensik @david_chisnall @Arcaik @lerxst I’ve been a cypherpunk since Usenet was the hotness. Would you like a thousand examples where the shit imagined became reality?

Oppose ‘has to’. On principle. This time around, if Cali behaves, I fear the states that go further. And then they smooth out the wrinkles and Cali gets a bit more severe, or lack of impact (because, let’s face it, this nanny shit is either draconian or ineffectual or both, sought by folks who don’t deserve to be in the room when digital policy is written) … sorry, the parenthetical got away from me.. or lack of impact will yield a version 2, just a little more. Then a bit more.

Yeah, I’m opposed to it all, since it’s a terrible thing that strips a digital freedom, empowers the controlling, and has no chance of accomplishing the ostensible goals.