535
When No ID Means No Internet: Age Verification and the Right to Access Information (www.eff.org)
submitted 4 days ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Age verification proposals are often presented as a simple tradeoff: sacrifice a little privacy to better safeguard children online. But that framing overlooks a more fundamental question. What happens to people who cannot verify their age at all? This is particularly a problem when users are required to prove their age with identity documents.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 59 points 4 days ago (22 children)

What our glorious ill informed leaders do not seem to have realised as yet is that it will apply to them too. So everything they look at online will be linked to their actual identity and is thereby more easily discerned, to be spewed all over the internet when the time is right. Or maybe that is the point, delivery of prosecution or blackmail in neater and more convenient packages.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] 66 points 4 days ago (20 children)

    I’m sure the rich have a way of avoiding this somehow.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 4 days ago (19 children)

    That’s the fun part - they don’t! There are no special 1s nor 0s

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] 34 points 4 days ago (17 children)

    They can just pay to use someone else's identity.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [+] -16 points 4 days ago (16 children)

    So can you? I still fail to see the moat

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 30 points 3 days ago (11 children)

    No you can't, because you don't have the money.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [+] -19 points 3 days ago (9 children)

    Still makes no sense to me. You’ve failed to make a convincing argument.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 3 days ago (6 children)

    You do realize that a significant amount of laws that apply to the population don't apply to politicians and the ultra wealthy, right?

    It's currently one of the biggest societal issues on the planet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 3 days ago* (5 children)

    The point of this comment thread is not about who can get away with it. That’s not up for debate.

    The only point I have made is: the wealthy have no more power to hide their online activities than you or I do

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 days ago (4 children)

    Yes, it is. The statement was that they would be beholden to the same age verification requirements that we would.

    What people have been trying to tell you is that your assumption isn't backed by precedent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    You can argue whatever you like, but that’s not what was being discussed. Maybe start a new thread?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

    That’s the fun part - they don’t! There are no special 1s nor 0s

    Yea, it was what was being discussed. Your assertion is that it's impossible for the ruling class to have an exception. You seem to think a technical limitation exists where none does.

    You're factually incorrect, and show neither an understanding of how networking/websites function, or understanding of how the ultra wealthy and the politicians they buy have a very long history of giving themselves loopholes so the rules don't apply to them.

    Stop moving the goalposts

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    I can also run over someone with my car. They can get away with it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    I’m not debating a straw man argument

    It’s not about “getting away with it” - my point is I can mask my online activity as well or better than anyone with endless funds

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 days ago* (1 child)

    my point is I can mask my online activity as well or better than anyone with endless funds

    For now. But we're not talking about the status quo; we're talking about a future with comprehensive age verification schemes that render all your current masking tactics impossible or illegal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 24 points 4 days ago*

    t will apply to them too.

    No it won't. That's not how The Network State functions.

    You have a very clearly designated In-Group and Out-Group. Just stay in the In-Group and you'll be fine.

    You're not going to beat segregation by telling a bunch of coked up white boys "One day you won't be allowed to drink from a water fountain". Everyone knows that's not true. That's not how these barriers function.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent