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.
I really wish people would stop weaponizing children to encroach on everyone’s privacy.
then politics would cease to exist🤣
The people who can verify their identity will be less willing to share their opinion on certain topics once they know they aren’t anonymous. I’m certain this is one of the goals. The reactions to political news, world events, law proposals and atrocities will be far more muted and it will be easier to control the population.
Have you heard of Facebook? People use their real names and don’t give a single fuck.
IMO, because this all centers on access to social media platforms, it’s also a restriction on freedom of speech. Kids can’t talk to other people just because of the form of communication? Fucking bullshit and does absolutely fuck all to fix the true underlying problems. The lack of ID also just puts the restriction on many unhoused adults and is very likely to be an intentional side effect.
Age verification laws reshape who can speak, who can access information, and who gets excluded from the digital public sphere. In other words, age verification is not a neutral safety measure: it presents a structural barrier to disproportionately exclude certain groups—particularly those in the global majority—and alters the architecture of global online expression. Some of these groups are already marginalized offline, and age verification extends that exclusion into digital spaces.
For instance, 850 million people globally do not have ID. Most of these individuals exist in primarily low and middle income countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. The World Bank points out that many are members of marginalized groups and more than half of those lacking access to identity documentation also have children whose births have not been registered. Women are particularly vulnerable and are 8% less likely than men to have an ID. Other vulnerable groups, such as adults in low income countries, are less likely to have an ID when they fall below 25 years, as are those with a primary school education or less or those in rural areas.
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.
I’m sure the rich have a way of avoiding this somehow.
That’s the fun part - they don’t! There are no special
1s nor0sThey can just pay to use someone else’s identity.
So can you? I still fail to see the moat
No you can’t, because you don’t have the money.
Still makes no sense to me. You’ve failed to make a convincing argument.
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.
I can also run over someone with my car. They can get away with it.
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
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.
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.
I’m really starting to think that Reticulum is the eventual way of the future for network communications.
I was just checking that out here: https://reticulum.network/
Their docs link to this related project: https://github.com/markqvist/NomadNet
Why does this README suggest modifying the system to allow pip to break system packages?
Then it goes on to say you might need to reboot, when simply closing the terminal for a new one should work.
Who wrote this?
You’re right, but for now, until the reticulum networks get built up, Tor and I2P are going to be the only ways possible. The CuckNet will be a useless place to be, and the only place you’ll actually be able to get real information is on the dark web.
I’m payin $25/mo to join an online community by a YouTuber I follow and everyone is using their real names and real photos (or simulacra thereof). It’s pretty crazy.
But I think what will happen is communities will be based on trust, and that trust will eventually be enforced by siloed environments.
Like, right now, I’m guessing that the site’s software is probably hoovering up information and it’s all centralized somewhere… but maybe in the future, if small communities become the norm, providing real privacy will be a thing.
I think small communities should be the norm.
Social media that makes it so that you’re always anonymous and always speaking to strangers creates a lot of problems (Internet Fuckwad Theory)
Recognizing other users and knowing that your behaviour will result in a negative reputation goes a long way towards creating higher quality discussions. Moderation isn’t as needed and it’s harder for outside actors to manufacture a consensus by spamming bot accounts.
I think that’d go a long way towards resolving a lot of problems created by social media.
Basically describing what happened with Lemmy. What started out as Reddit Minus Shitbag Mods became a screaming match between .world and .ml, while everyone on .hexbear retreated into exile.
You still won’t have any real trust, because the accusations of “bot” and “shill” will follow anyone who violates a taboo. But you’ll at least have a few people you recognize, who you can have well-defined opinions on.
I’m thinking more the opposite.
I’m thinking, “How do I keep my information out of the hands of centralized database looking for people spreading discontent?”
Lemmy succeeds only so far as it is anymous, but absent that, anyone can plug in and siphon the database.
A siloed server with good security could lack anonymity, but because the data is not centralized, the feds would have to take a special interest to create an account, and because there would be so many of these instances, it would be a very time consuming process.
But maybe SI, which is what the fascists are calling the fascism machine, would make a mockery of that.
I’m thinking, “How do I keep my information out of the hands of centralized database looking for people spreading discontent?”
On a public forum?
A siloed server with good security could lack anonymity, but because the data is not centralized, the feds would have to take a special interest to create an account, and because there would be so many of these instances, it would be a very time consuming process.
Kinda depends how it’s hosted. You don’t need an account to mine AWS if you can just pick through the backend.
If it’s hosted on AWS with a centrally accessible backend, it’s not siloed.
The idea is that you can have access, but there’s a BARRIER to access for very little gain–the messages of a few hundred users at most.
And if you want to be a dick about it, you can even rate limit to avoid quick and easy data scraping.
