🇪🇺 European Citizen's Initiative against ID age verification online
-
European Citizen's Initiative against ID age verification onlineJust yesterday, Stop Killing the Internet, from the people at @StopKillingGames, launched an ECI against ID age verification! This is great but it needs 1 million signatures !
So, if you are a citizen of #eu , please sign it! If you don't, or even if you do, still share it around so more people know about it and can sign it!
https://eci.ec.europa.eu/066/public/#/screen/home
Reaching the signature threshold will not mean that ID age verification will immediately become illegal, but the subject will be brought to the @EUCommission and they'll have to do SOMETHING about it. This is already a huge step in the right direction!
Please boost and share this post to spread the word! Thank you! -
@imbl@social.treehouse.systems @helloyanis@furries.club @StopKillingGames@mastodon.social @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu They just want it a method without sending a copy of your ID to the service lol
@nyovaya @EUCommission @StopKillingGames @imbl Yeah exactly, currently age verification involves sending your ID and scanning your face and sending those to company servers.
If we can get this to be gone it's already a step in the right direction in my opinion.
-
@nyovaya @EUCommission @StopKillingGames @imbl Yeah exactly, currently age verification involves sending your ID and scanning your face and sending those to company servers.
If we can get this to be gone it's already a step in the right direction in my opinion.
@helloyanis@furries.club @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu @StopKillingGames@mastodon.social @imbl@social.treehouse.systems Theres not a lot of services currently doing that (in the EU) from what Im aware of. Maybe we should stand up against age verification completely.
-
@helloyanis@furries.club @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu @StopKillingGames@mastodon.social @imbl@social.treehouse.systems Theres not a lot of services currently doing that (in the EU) from what Im aware of. Maybe we should stand up against age verification completely.
@nyovaya @EUCommission @StopKillingGames @imbl True, I'm also against it but between the unregulated minefield that is the case now and an open source solution I would prefer that one.
And if it's open source I think anyone can make a fork to just bypass it too, so that can be cool too.
Just, going from "Social media bans and ID age verification everywhere" to "No age verification anywhere" is probably not gonna pass at the eu commission.
-
European Citizen's Initiative against ID age verification online
Just yesterday, Stop Killing the Internet, from the people at @StopKillingGames, launched an ECI against ID age verification! This is great but it needs 1 million signatures !
So, if you are a citizen of #eu , please sign it! If you don't, or even if you do, still share it around so more people know about it and can sign it!
https://eci.ec.europa.eu/066/public/#/screen/home
Reaching the signature threshold will not mean that ID age verification will immediately become illegal, but the subject will be brought to the @EUCommission and they'll have to do SOMETHING about it. This is already a huge step in the right direction!
Please boost and share this post to spread the word! Thank you!@helloyanis
That's literally not what the initiative is about.The title appears promising, and baits absentminded signatures: "No Digital ID & No Age Verification"
But then the text says: "The legislation should require anonymous or pseudonymous proof-of-age"
So do we ban, or do we require? And how is "pseudonymous" any different from an ID?
(1/?)
-
@helloyanis
That's literally not what the initiative is about.The title appears promising, and baits absentminded signatures: "No Digital ID & No Age Verification"
But then the text says: "The legislation should require anonymous or pseudonymous proof-of-age"
So do we ban, or do we require? And how is "pseudonymous" any different from an ID?
(1/?)
@helloyanis
It supposedly wants that "digital identity and age-assurance systems used to access online services in the Union remain voluntary, privacy-preserving and non-discriminatory."All of these are empty virtue signals. "Voluntary" - yes, you can just lose access to the services and accept it. "Privacy-preserving" - every implementation already calls itself that, and politicians agree. "Non-discriminatory" - well! I need more characters for this one.
(2/?)
-
@helloyanis
It supposedly wants that "digital identity and age-assurance systems used to access online services in the Union remain voluntary, privacy-preserving and non-discriminatory."All of these are empty virtue signals. "Voluntary" - yes, you can just lose access to the services and accept it. "Privacy-preserving" - every implementation already calls itself that, and politicians agree. "Non-discriminatory" - well! I need more characters for this one.
(2/?)
@helloyanis
Do we really think that the institutions and companies rolling out these policies that disproportionately target LGBTQ+ and furry communities, systematically reducing our visibility, ability to organise, receive money, and sometimes even just to talk to each other, are going to interpret this the same way we do?And even *if* - then what of it, once a more right wing govt comes in and declares mentions of LGBTQ+ topics strictly adult-only?
(3/?)
-
@helloyanis
Do we really think that the institutions and companies rolling out these policies that disproportionately target LGBTQ+ and furry communities, systematically reducing our visibility, ability to organise, receive money, and sometimes even just to talk to each other, are going to interpret this the same way we do?And even *if* - then what of it, once a more right wing govt comes in and declares mentions of LGBTQ+ topics strictly adult-only?
(3/?)
@helloyanis
"Citizens must not be forced to identify themselves to access lawful online content or services unless strictly necessary, proportionate and provided by law."We're not the ones defining what counts as "lawful", "strictly necessary", "proportionate", or "provided by law".
Furry art could be made illegal. Every grifter is screaming about the absolute irrevocable necessity to "protect children". Laws are being passed that require IDs for everything.
(4/?)
-
@helloyanis
"Citizens must not be forced to identify themselves to access lawful online content or services unless strictly necessary, proportionate and provided by law."We're not the ones defining what counts as "lawful", "strictly necessary", "proportionate", or "provided by law".
Furry art could be made illegal. Every grifter is screaming about the absolute irrevocable necessity to "protect children". Laws are being passed that require IDs for everything.
(4/?)
@helloyanis
Like, is this a psyop? Who exactly at @StopKillingGames is behind this?Using our signatures to whitewash the age/id verification agenda is completely unacceptable. As presented, this initiative basically rubberstamps whatever "cool" age/id checks gets introduced by those seeking to centralise control over the internet, to police what & whom we're allowed to see, to profile "undesirables", and to harm children by denying them access to life-saving support.
(5/5)
cc @karb
-
@helloyanis That's what I thought when I first read it as well. But then politicians *supposedly* believe that age verification laws are proportionate to protect children. They establish law for purpose of protecting children and they believe this is a necessary step towards safety of children.
I think the only side that can actually step in and have different take on question whether age verification laws are proportionate is the EU Court, similarly to how French Constitutional council rejected social media ban for children. But this can take time.
And how "voluntary" ID Wallet could be within framework of this initiative is explained by section on article I've linked "The law may qualify a tool as voluntary, but voluntariness risks being merely formal when the main services accept a single infrastructure, when the alternatives are less accessible, slower or more costly, when not using the Wallet produces practical disadvantages, or when the user is effectively forced to choose between identifying themselves and giving up the service — possibly even in contexts where age assurance is neither necessary nor proportionate.".
@Frisk @helloyanis the standard playbook on this one---because the UK was doing it 20 years ago with mandatory school web filtering, which on the surface sounds like an "of course you should do that, who could possibly object"---is also to declare *any mention* of homosexuality (or anything but cisgender) to be "adult content", so gay or trans kids grow up thinking they're broken and learning to repress it (or don't make it to adulthood at all; either works when your goal is eradication)
-
@helloyanis
Like, is this a psyop? Who exactly at @StopKillingGames is behind this?Using our signatures to whitewash the age/id verification agenda is completely unacceptable. As presented, this initiative basically rubberstamps whatever "cool" age/id checks gets introduced by those seeking to centralise control over the internet, to police what & whom we're allowed to see, to profile "undesirables", and to harm children by denying them access to life-saving support.
(5/5)
cc @karb
@helloyanis i should clarify: no hard feelings towards you at all! i'm just trying to be pointed and explicit about all this to spark some serious discourse, because it worries me that this (at the very least misguided) initiative is set up to override the voices of concern and dissent that we really need in the spotlight
-
@helloyanis i should clarify: no hard feelings towards you at all! i'm just trying to be pointed and explicit about all this to spark some serious discourse, because it worries me that this (at the very least misguided) initiative is set up to override the voices of concern and dissent that we really need in the spotlight
@outfrost So, what I think (but feel free to ask people at SKG if I'm right) is :
- Sending your ID or face to verify your age online would be completely banned
- But age verification itself would not be banned
- The solution for age verification should be open source (so you can see what it does), decentralized (so you or anyone can host it) and receive independent security audits (so you know it's safe). Other companies who claim privacy are not doing that so you just have to take their word for it.
- If countries make stuff like furry art illegal or LGBT+ topics illegal, then that's sadly beyond the scope of this ECI which only focuses on age verification onlineIt's not a perfect solution but it's already a step in the right direction as opposed to now where private companies use an AI to process your ID and face
-
M marcusxms@helvede.net shared this topic
