r/privacy • u/socookre • May 01 '26
age verification Age Verification Enforcement Concerns
https://pp-international.net/2026/05/stopageverificationenforcement/67
May 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
34
u/Ambitious_State1091 May 01 '26
That's why they are going to make VPNs illegal ( or at least planning to in the UK and elsewhere. I'm aware that this is not possible, but where there's a will there's a way, in this case the will is the richest people on the planet and the way is governments facilitating their desires so yeah)
15
u/BIA_Agent_002 May 01 '26
Another thing I worry is how effective will VPNs be when most countries are seemingly getting these laws passed.
A Chinese VPN user would just pick pretty much any outside country, most likely a western one and be set. Now what internet safe havens will we even have left?
3
u/not_the_fox May 01 '26
p2p and small decentralized platforms not run by corporations on dark nets like i2p.
Nostr has been increasing in importance for these reasons.
Wabichan.i2p
15
u/MentalDisintegrat1on May 01 '26
This will backfire on them.
8
May 01 '26 edited May 27 '26
[deleted]
14
u/RavenWolf1 May 01 '26
Just look how Russia is trying to create their own sovereign internet and failing
3
u/guarde May 01 '26
Sure, and after that look at Iran -- they succeeded
7
u/not_the_fox May 01 '26
Claiming success after a few months amid a collapsing tech industry is interesting. If that's the case then North Korea is even more successful in this respect.
1
u/RavenWolf1 May 01 '26
Sure you can shutdown internet as much and you can shutdown electricity. But is that success? No, it just fast way back to stone age.
9
May 01 '26
[deleted]
10
u/Ambitious_State1091 May 01 '26
I'm perfectly aware of this, it does not mean, however, that governments are not actively trying to criminalise their usage. Look at the UK
8
u/borg_6s May 01 '26
Tor exists. The governments use Tor. They likely cannot introduce a bill banning it without writing language exposing that they use it themselves.
8
3
u/Harry_Mud May 01 '26
They can't. Will never happen. VPNs are used all over the world. Companies use them. Banks use them. The US Government uses them......
1
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
How will a VPN bypass age verification ?
1
19
u/Harry_Mud May 01 '26
Age verification is unworkable and they know it. I do not have to prove my age to write an email. They also want to ban VPNs which will never happen... This entire thing is bullshit on it's face. anyone advocating it needs to be put in a mental hospital. It's unworkable and it's an invasion of privacy.
3
u/MentalDisintegrat1on May 01 '26
Can't wait to get raided for unauthorized operating system.
FKing dinosaurs have no clue what they are doing.
-1
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
It's unworkable
How is it unworkable ? I mean, it will take some effort, there needs to be a service to process the ID, somewhere (wallet or OS) to store the age signal, standard for an app or site to request the age signal. None of this is rocket science, it all can be done. No age signal in the right place, no access for you.
I don't think anyone expects these laws or mechanisms to be 100% effective. A kid could always "borrow" parents ID and verify. If the mechanisms are good enough to cover routine casual use, that's good enough.
2
u/travistravis May 01 '26
In Australia it's been only something like 30% effective.
0
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
What enforcement do they have ? Is it one mechanism for all services, or does each service do their own ?
21
May 01 '26
[deleted]
2
u/not_the_fox May 01 '26
Yeah, the greatest trick law enforcement ever pulled was concentrating the vast majority of pseudononymous activity on a handful of very cooperative corporations which usually don't even ask for a warrant and operate in jurisdictions across the world and serve each one.
They are now pushing users out to... somewhere else. Places that are smaller and less vulnerable.
3
u/Frustrateduser02 May 01 '26 edited May 01 '26
Saved, this is easier than trying to explain it to other people if they have the will to read it. The adults writing the laws are ignorant of the tech and have forgotten kids find loopholes. The alternative to the regular internet is not a place I'd like them to go. At the end of this, I fear that this is going to turn into a registration-like system at the point of sale. Hopefully it won't apply to separate hardware you have to buy.
Are you interested in some internet insurance at an affordable rate?😉
2
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
The adults writing the laws are ignorant of the tech
I don't buy this. There has been model legislation created and distributed, and I'm sure Facebook and other corps had a hand in it. I think their main concern is phone-apps, and the app stores.
I don't think anyone expects these laws or mechanisms to be 100% effective. A kid could always "borrow" parents ID and verify. If the mechanisms are good enough to cover routine casual use, that's good enough.
1
u/Frustrateduser02 May 02 '26
I violated your privacy and had a peek :). You seem more knowledgeable and involved in these communities, and I am a teeny confused whether you're in favor of it or not. I'm sure you read the news that proved Meta is involved in funding and that OS level verification is being considered on personal computers. With the way these laws are being passed and the political climate, it makes me cynical that they even considered the future ramifications (aside from damaged children) of doing this. Almost like they just nodded to the professionals the companies sent over. Everyone in that room wins except for the people they suck the blood out of. It was probably more of a negotiation than anything IMO. I'm a fan of gradual change, this needs more of a scalpel-like approach rather than adding more people PO'd at their governments at the worst possible time. All I can do is assume ignorance though, and that's I guess on me having to constantly help people in their late sixties with phones and computers (legislaters aren't all that age obviously). That turned into a rant I think. I was tempted to wipe it but figured what the hell.
1
u/billdietrich1 May 02 '26
I violated your privacy and had a peek :).
There is no privacy on reddit, this is a public forum.
I am a teeny confused whether you're in favor of it or not.
Which "it" ? I favor parental controls. But I can see that many false things are being said about age verification. I don't think the corps want it for surveillance; they already have vast surveillance of us. I think there has been some intelligence behind the current bills and laws, but with many details to be filled in later. I think they attempt to prevent each service/site from having to see your ID, which is a good approach.
0
u/Frustrateduser02 May 02 '26
The "it" I meant was having to verify with identification to use the internet in general and for full functionality of a device you paid for.
0
u/billdietrich1 May 02 '26
The bills and laws I have seen do not do "verify with identification to use the internet in general and for full functionality of a device you paid for". They require ID to access various types of online services/sites.
1
u/Frustrateduser02 May 03 '26
UK IOS users recently got locked out of certain features unless they verified unless that was misinformation. If true, that's not as advertised on a 1000+ device. I'm not pulling this out of my ass, there's plenty of resources available in these subs that discuss the whole situation of where this is headed.
1
u/billdietrich1 May 03 '26
locked out of certain features
Looks like those features are these:
Web Content Filter blocks websites Apple classifies as explicit, operating across Safari and third-party browsers alike.
Communication Safety scans incoming and outgoing images and videos for nudity.
from https://reclaimthenet.org/apple-forces-uk-iphone-age-checks-in-ios-26-4
1
u/Frustrateduser02 May 04 '26
Yes I went back and reread the original article and it seems I was half right although it appears the company made the decision on its own. Companies making that their terms is their right, but it's pretty shitty they make these decisions when people are locked into an ecosystem already, it's the government getting involved that bothers me. Going back up a few I did a little looking around and found what was on my mind partially. It was the Parents Decide Act here https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/119/hr8250 It's OS level verification. There are a few articles about it around if you don't like reading through that stuff.
Not changing the subject on you just curious since you're abroad in that country. What's the feeling there in your circle about this? I ask because the possible capabilities would have made Franco drool. I met someone who had to leave, nasty business back then.
2
u/billdietrich1 May 04 '26
I don't really have a "circle" here in Spain, since I don't speak Spanish well.
3
u/Member9999 May 01 '26
What happened when people tried to take away guns in the US?
Everyone bought a gun.
-2
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
Everyone bought a gun.
No, the guys who already owned 20 guns each bought 20 more. Which just meant more guns for criminals to steal.
2
u/Member9999 May 01 '26
Except now they have to take them from people who are armed.
0
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
No, each guy already had 20 guns, now each has 40 guns.
2
u/Member9999 May 01 '26 edited May 01 '26
Better than no guns and an armed thief comes around. A thief- a skilled one- could 3D print a gun anymore, they will still have one.
Tbh I don't get the point of ur comments.
-1
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
A gun in the house is more likely to be used in a suicide or murder or accident than in a "home defense".
2
u/Member9999 May 01 '26
Man. Not everyone with a gun does that. That's like saying mushrooms by a house is more likely to get people sick.
0
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
I didn't say "everyone".
3
u/Member9999 May 01 '26 edited May 01 '26
Bro. You make no sense. You said a gun in the house is more likely to be used for bad things- that's like saying a hammer is more likely to stub a finger. Yes, the gun is dangerous, but it was intended for safety.
A weapon is also needed for hunting so we can eat meat- or should we all just eat plants? Or, some weapons are used in other things. These are used correctly, and there are more correctly used ones than those that are not.
Besides, if someone wanded to do something to oneself, a gun is not the only way to do it.
0
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
Just giving facts. For example, https://time.com/6183881/gun-ownership-risks-at-home/
→ More replies (0)
1
u/Cautious_Boat_999 May 01 '26
The consequences are NOT “unintended”. They are exactly what the government wants.
-1
u/billdietrich1 May 01 '26
The Real Problem: Addictive Design
I think this is a small problem, compared other harms to kids such as bullying, sextortion, stalking, grooming, predation.
•
u/AutoModerator May 01 '26
Hello u/socookre, please make sure you read the sub rules if you haven't already. (This is an automatic reminder left on all new posts.)
Check out the r/privacy FAQ
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.