this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2025

299 points (100.0% liked)

PC Gaming

pcgaming@lemmy.ca

15,486 readers

4,537 active

504 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

Be Respectful.
No Spam or Porn.
No Advertising.
No Memes.
No Tech Support.
No questions about buying/building computers.
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 3 years ago

moderators

EXiLExJD@lemmy.ca

UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca

KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Roblox begins asking tens of millions of children to verify their age with a selfie (www.engadget.com)

submitted 10 months ago by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca

59 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 4 points 10 months ago (17 children)

hah.

personally i think a big part of the problem is that real-name identification for things that shouldn't need it is just sort of accepted, rather than being criticised as the massive invasion of privacy that it is. whether it includes children or not is a side note in my mind.

parent

hideshow 17 child comments

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 10 months ago* (16 children)

Oh absolutely, and we should go back to 1990s anonymity

But here we are. Everything has an endoscope.

parent

hideshow 16 child comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 10 months ago (15 children)

well, we're here. but the companies and governments pushing this are already looking at possible next steps, like building systems where your real identity is used everywhere.

parent

hideshow 15 child comments

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (14 children)

And part of what I want is for children to be excluded. To not be tracked. It's a good wedge that turns their rhetoric against them.

parent

hideshow 14 child comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 2 points 10 months ago (13 children)

maybe. when china did it with their law about children not using their phones after curfew, they handled it by building a face database of everyone except children, then matching against that.

parent

hideshow 13 child comments

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago* (12 children)

Still fucking awful, but more work and keeps kids a little safer than the opposite

parent

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 10 months ago (11 children)

also a very useful way to mask your true reason if your true reason is "i want to build a database of people". four horsemen of the internet type shit.

parent

hideshow 11 child comments

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (10 children)

Yes but I don't think anyone but the ccp is capable of actually doing that competently at the scale of a large country. Maybe ten years ago google might've had a shot.

parent

hideshow 10 child comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 10 months ago (9 children)

doing it incompetently is arguably worse, because that involves storing way too much info and sharing it too freely.

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago* (8 children)

Yeah. I'm not a fan of any if this, but nobody cares when you say 'dont be evil¹'; not being pointlessly recklessly evil isn't a serious grown-up policy. better to do a political Tesla valve; introduce competing contradictory evil, dilute the propaganda, and arrest momemtym

¹except HUAC. HUAC cares.

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 point 10 months ago (7 children)

you say that, but if that was the case why would ibm go to all that trouble to get an exclusion from the json user agreement clause "the software shall be used for good, not evil"?

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (6 children)

Yeah they did the 30s/40s equivalent, but I don't think they still have the functional capacity to work at that scale.

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 point 10 months ago (5 children)

they probably do, just that we don't get to hear about it until a couple of years have passed.

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago* (4 children)

No like i don't think they're still competent enough. Morally, sure, thry could be that evil.

If, say, Denver needed that database, they'd do it before the check cleared.

I dont think they could do it for a large country.

They would want to, they would take the contract, ans it would hire so many subcontractors cut so many corners the end product would be unrecognizable.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 point 10 months ago* (3 children)

Edit: sorry, reuters seems to be stripping stuff off of the link. the quote i linked to is

Technology giants Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft, and IBM were named as "central to Israel's surveillance apparatus and the ongoing Gaza destruction."

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 10 months ago (2 children)

It takes all of them plus the Zionist state, for something smaller than California.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

fair enough. i just know ibm is a big actor with many european governments as well, more so than the others. probably by virtue of having been around a lot longer.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago

And certain preexisting relationships.

parent