Age verification means identity verification.
-
@jwildeboer @michael @jwcph @kasperd Can I add a thought here? All this talk is about 'age' as if that is the magic key needed to judge if a person is vulnerable and should be protected from potentially harmful information.
I suggest this should be more widely considered as a 'duty of care' responsibilty between a vulnerable person of any age and someone who takes care of them.
The carer needs both the tools and the cooperation of potentially harmful information providers to do their duty 1/2
@jwildeboer @michael @jwcph @kasperd IMHO regulation should mandate the tools to exist and be usable by carers without govt or commerical entities needing to know anything at all about the people involved.
Carers need to be able to delegate their restriction requirements to platforms, and trust that they work. They do NOT need to delegate their decision to apply a restriction. That stays between them and the person in their care.
I say we should not hand over duty of care to other agencies 2/2
-
And to those that say that anonymity (or rather pseudonymity) can be implemented with zero knowledge proofs — yes. But that’s not what is being used in currently preferred age/identity verification „solutions“ which tend to be centralised, commercial offerings.
2/2
There is no such thing as zero-knowledge proof. Such schemes merely change which big government/business gets the knowledge.
See, for example, the European Digital Identity Wallet (EUDIW). The EU government doesn't get the knowledge of which websites you're using…but the app requires the use of a Google-approved phone, so Google gets the knowledge.
Anonymity, and therefore privacy and freedom of speech, is fundamentally incompatible with age verification. Full stop.
-
There is no such thing as zero-knowledge proof. Such schemes merely change which big government/business gets the knowledge.
See, for example, the European Digital Identity Wallet (EUDIW). The EU government doesn't get the knowledge of which websites you're using…but the app requires the use of a Google-approved phone, so Google gets the knowledge.
Anonymity, and therefore privacy and freedom of speech, is fundamentally incompatible with age verification. Full stop.
@argv_minus_one Yep. That's my point.
-
@kasperd @kramse @jwildeboer @michael That's a lot of words just to say "I don't think we should hold the platforms making billions on endangering & harming our children responsible"...
Is the Fediverse “making billions on endangering & harming our children”?
No, of course not. The vast majority of Fedi sites aren't making money at all, let alone billions. They're paid for by some volunteer's day job and a trickle of donations.
So why are Fedi sites to be forced to either conjure billions out of thin air to pay for age verification, or shut down entirely?
-
Is the Fediverse “making billions on endangering & harming our children”?
No, of course not. The vast majority of Fedi sites aren't making money at all, let alone billions. They're paid for by some volunteer's day job and a trickle of donations.
So why are Fedi sites to be forced to either conjure billions out of thin air to pay for age verification, or shut down entirely?
@argv_minus_one @jwcph @kasperd @jwildeboer @michael
pretty sure what was meant was Facebook et al, which are the places where abuse happens
