tripleman, a šØš¦ in š©šŖ
mhoyeAge verification is a deliberate attack on system sovereignty, both for individuals and countries. Thereās no āage verifcationā, there is only āidentity verification that includes ageā, and the system doing that verification is not just a privacy-invasive user tracking system but a remotely controlled off switch for anyone of any age.
There is nothing special about āageā as a differentiator. Itās just a data point, a condition and a branch. And if a system exists that can start from some condition of your identity and decide that you donāt get to use a computer today - meaning, talk to your friends or employer or read the news or get medical information or, you know, _participate in society_, then that system can use _any_ data to make that decision. Age, gender, race, credit rating, anything about you and anyone like you.
If this system exists at all, then everyone subject to it is one state-coerced software update from away from their computer working for them only at the whim of that state. Age, gender, race, disability, debt, credit rating, citizenship, neighborhood, search history, political affiliation, all of that plus the state itself is one breach away from no computer working - or only the _right people's_ computers working, you understand - at all.
Age verification is the footgun of public democracy.
At the implementation level data is just data, and in a democratic society, human privacy and state sovereignty are the same the same thing. You wouldn't think so, until you take a hard look into how to implement them, but they are the same thing. And both of them are national security issues.
Nobody will be made safer, by age verification. But everyone will be put at risk by the systems that have to exist to implement it.
can everything be outside now?@mhoye thank you for this, I've been kind of skeptical of this, and you've moved me significantly closer to your position.
I don't like any state mandated age verification, but I do think we need something along the lines of a consumer opt-in "naive Internet". For all the stuff you talk about that's necessary for daily life we should be able to do that as safely as we can walk down the street.
If people can put up a storefront that leads you into a scam or sex shop on the way to interacting with your local government or doing your homework or paying your utilities that's unacceptable.
Age verification isn't a fix, but ignoring these problems just leaves more space for bad laws and policing.
JoeHenzi@thesquirrelfish @mhoye Age verification is not a fix, but ignoring the problem isn't a fix either. People are addicted to social media and fighting to keep it, no matter who is dead.
@JoeHenzi @thesquirrelfish "Age verification is not a fix, but ignoring the problem isn't a fix either, so we're going to verify age" is silly, and this whole exercise is an attempt _by social media companies_ to push the burden of responsibility for age verification - and the liability for failure - away from the people who _should_ be verifying the ages of their customers: those same social networks.
@mhoye @thesquirrelfish sorry you're stuck in a loop - age verification is a red herring, you're going in circles on it
to the point, you're now saying social media companies should police themselves for some reason?
if there are products that are so harmful we need to protect people of certain ages then maybe, idk, we should get rid of those products
@JoeHenzi @thesquirrelfish bad news about how prohibition worked out, I guess.
@mhoye @thesquirrelfish sigh, you're right, we should do nothing even though we have this mountain of evidence, it's the same...
EDIT: Weird analogy, since you have to show ID to buy alcohol.
@thesquirrelfish @mhoye exactly - the algorithm is the problem - it was connecting pedophiles with kids to keep both parties on platform... that's criminal. Asking for ID doesn't do anything.
@thesquirrelfish @mhoye we're all being abused - I'm super suspect of people out here defending these evil company's right to make money off us.
How Private Equity Turns Your Favorite Channels Into Slop
The Animal and the Machine@mhoye @Gargron
And if we have to do this by government law, we should verify to a single gov database that confirms we are who we are to other systems.
All of us giving our identity info to all the systems is stupid squared.
For my next insurer I want the Gov to confirm who I am, not hand over a pile of personal stuff. If the Government canāt do this safely, thatās my proof it shouldnāt be done.
Edit: non-government 3rd party should also be available but the law should state the user gets to chose which, and doesnāt have to use a shitty one forced by a retailer.
itgrrl 
Advanced Persistent Teapot@http_error_418 @mhoye @Gargron
No. A slight retraction. I made an edit to say also 3rd party but user gets to chose.
What is important is the user isnāt forced to verify with a scammer who offers a free verification service to the retailer.
The government supply a service but also allow other recognised 3rd parties, so you should get to chose which. Not Google. Not Microsoft. Not Amazon. You.
Offbeatmammal@taatm @mhoye @Gargron I had initially thought have the OS do the verification, and only respond "true" or "false" to a transparent condition (eg user gets to see the app is asking for age>=18) but putting the onus onto Govt entities is even better (single point of failure, and we know how they love to shirk blame, but tie it into personal consequences for the politicians in power at the time of a breach and maybe it would work)
Ted Mielczarek@Offbeatmammal @taatm @mhoye @Gargron I, personally, do not want any government or corporation to hold that kind of power over what I can do with my own computing devices.
Urzl@tedmielczarek @Offbeatmammal @taatm @mhoye @Gargron But I do want them accountable when they force it on me anyway.
Kevin Karhan@mhoye EXACTLY THAT is why I #RefuseToComply and bow before #Cyberfascists #Terrorists' demands like "#AgeVerification" ( @OS1337 ) and I expect others to do the same!
jimfl
lord pthenq1"La verificaciĆ³n de edad constituye un ataque deliberado a la soberanĆa del sistema, tanto para los individuos como para los paĆses. No existe tal cosa como la Ā«verificaciĆ³n de edadĀ»; lo Ćŗnico que existe es una Ā«verificaciĆ³n de identidad que incluye la edadĀ», y el sistema encargado de realizar dicha verificaciĆ³n no es meramente un sistema de rastreo de usuarios invasivo para la privacidad, sino un interruptor de apagado controlado a distancia, aplicable a cualquier persona de cualquier edad."
Wolfgang MAEHR@mhoye Iām wondering if it would be possible create a protocol similar to passkeys, where the device verifies my identity but only exposes my DOB to a service?
tsadilas
Kierkethumbs up convincingly@mhoye big brother is literally taking notes
Hey Gus> what about kids that have no / bad parents, doesnāt it make sense then to have a baseline?
Fucking no. We donāt limit everyoneās freedom for an imagined worst case minority. However many heartstrings it tugs on.
Thank you for your description of this too. Iām going to reuse part of it as a way to describe why this is one of the worst possible things that could happen to people who are neutral or supportive.
FUCK
Rob Landley@mhoye I call it "age discrimination" because it is.
The nominal point is to age discriminate. (The actual point is to prevent anti-ice protests from organizing anonymously on signal next time.)
There's no "verification" in Gavin Newsom's bill, it's attestation like the "are you 18 y/n" clickthroughs sites have had since fosta/sesta under the first trump administration. The point is to mandate something you can then tie to palantir/clear/persona and your platform's TPM/SMM.
Trans Rescue@mhoye
I'm reminded why old order Amish don't use electricity. It's not that they're inherently anti-tech. Its that electricity ties you to someone else - they have the remote off switch on your lights.
I'm reminded why old order Amish don't use electricity. It's not that they're inherently anti-tech. Its that electricity ties you to someone else - they have the remote off switch on your lights.
Europe 2.0@mhoye social media desperately needs identity and age verification though. Government controlled (I trust my government to do this the right way)
William B Peckham@mhoye Let us say you are a parent and you think that having operating systems report the age of the user is a good idea. The browser connects to a social media site and it asks and the browser pulls the operating system and gets the age group and reports it to the social media site. Now the site only presents age-appropriate material, right? Except if there are predators on that site watching that flag: And what they have now is a clear and updated indicator for what accounts represent vulnerable young people who have not the knowledge to defend themselves. A victim list, if you will. /S isn't that a wonderful idea? S/..
DavidM_yeg<< Thereās no āage verifcationā, there is only āidentity verification that includes ageā >>
Exactly.
Kineneāš»@mhoye So, where in all of this silliness, are the adults, who in theory, are taking responsibility for the accountability of their children?
Age verification is easy to defeat... false IDs, anyone? Verification will lead to a new, improved, false ID industry. And who will monitor the databases for accuracy? Will ICE pay you a visit to demand your āPapierenā?