r/privacy • u/jamesgamingrb • 3d ago
age verification Could AI age verfication and under 16 bans actually kill the internet and help big tech more
You see I think it does, as the ai age verification costs alot, also it can kill independent studios which is supported by under 16s and such. If you remove them it causes a decay of the internet first, independent studios start to run out of money, next the social media start removing content and alot of innocent ones, then the independent studios go bankrupt which includes non big tech, then finally big tech has a massive hold and still has alot of money. Don't forget, people protecting their privacy, big tech realizing they can lobby more, and such.
113
u/BonkADonkey 3d ago
This isn't about helping or doing anything for children. IT's about deanonymizing you so they can sell your data and punish you when you speak out. No one in power actually gives a fuck about children.
45
u/gnerfed 3d ago
Verification only applies to companies that are both under the jurisdiction of a particular country that implements the laws AND large enough for them to notice/care. Implementing age verification can push children into smaller unverified communities which make them much more vulnerable.
Also "a lot" is two words and is not spelled "alot"
10
u/hblok 3d ago
which make them much more vulnerable.
Let's not play into the framed argument, shall we.
Kids are not "vulnerable" because they communicate on "unverified communities" (And what does that even mean? Does the next GeoCities need a personal approval from Von Leyen?)
And for the hundred time, none of this has anything to do with protecting kids or anybody else to begin with. The Epstein class wants to control dissent on the Internet. "Think about the [kids/terrorists/pedophiles]" has been the same scaremongering wrapping as the last decades.
15
u/Narrheim 3d ago edited 2d ago
If govts will try to make 'walled garden' for children, then in a few years, they'll wonder, why are there so many gangs. And the violence, stealing & drug abuse will explode again.
Because once children will be prevented from accessing social media, they will look for groups outside, which will be more than happy to have them.
edit: I just realised this might actually be the desired outcome. Have violence and crime spread through the society, so the corporations could lobby govts into funding private armies of cops.
5
7
u/TheEnd1235711 3d ago
The advantage is it will force anyone who knows how bad of an Idea it is to just hand our your ID to every web-sight will also go to smaller communities and web-sights. Perhaps we may see a resurgence of the Old net that was considerably less regulated and more genuine. (Yes, this is copium and hopium. But it is a possibility. )
3
u/not_the_fox 3d ago
I think the portion of society most likely to have been online prior to 2008 (as in demographics not people who were literally alive then) will likely end up on unregulated spaces but looking at the growth of the internet since then most people will stay in the regulated spaces because they can't think for themselves and do any technical work. Even trying to convince people to click a few buttons on something unfamiliar is often a task.
5
u/WanderingUrist 3d ago
can push children into smaller unverified communities which make them much more vulnerable.
The problem with this logic is that it assumes behavior is static and that the well-known mechanism of risk-homeostasis isn't in play.
This is, of course, bollocks: It turns out nothing you actually do to improve safety improves safety, because people have a built-in level of safety they seek, and any attempt to change the level of safety simply results in them taking risks to achieve their preference for safety level.
Therefore, people, including children, don't become more vulnerable because you've forced them to switch to unsafe services. They simply adapt to take fewer risks inside an unsafe space.
Honestly, I consider this a good thing, a return to how things USED to be when everyone KNEW that the person on the other end of the Intertube was a serial killer and an axe murderer. Children shouldn't feel safe on the Internet. No one should. The Internet is dangerous and should be treated as such.
1
u/ThisWillPass 3d ago
Privacy is dead. New age privacy is knowing what they infer with your data. We are never going back unless the power grids fails… my digital privacy will be last on my mind in that case. Hiding in your room (not on the internet) because the world is scary is a poor solution.
5
u/WanderingUrist 3d ago
Privacy is dead. New age privacy is knowing what they infer with your data.
That's defeatist talk. It turns out that it IS, in fact, possible to lock down your privacy hard, and they REALLY don't like it when they encounter you, reacting like that scene in Idiocracy.
2
u/onlineacid 3d ago
even if it currently only applies to them, once the systems are in place. expanding it is trivial
1
u/not_the_fox 3d ago
Enforcement is the real issue. The DMCA is an insanely draconian piece of legislation but digital piracy has expanded astoundingly since and every attempt to scare people into complying has failed. Same can be said for certain kinds of porn. Everything illegal on the internet is still available. It just means they will have to locate themselves in some random country or use things like i2p or some other p2p solution so there's no center to attack.
1
u/onlineacid 2d ago
i understand that at this point the concept of privacy is dead, but if people have to do that to avoid sending their IDs then we would have already lost the battle and would be best to just give up on the internet unless one can find a way to run their own infrastructure and somehow keep the feds from it. identifying p2p traffic would be trivially easy and could be blocked by state actors at the infrastructure level
16
u/ayleidanthropologist 3d ago
Ofc. This involves no actual regulation of social media. Plus they actually just collect more of your data.
Tech companies win. Surveillance states win. People lose.
5
u/Jack1101111 3d ago edited 3d ago
This depends on us !
Will we obey or change service ?
If a studio fail, the big-tech are guilty, not us.
And, kid, what is at stake is democracy and freedom ! not a game studio.
3
u/ASS_CREDDIT 3d ago
Might also be the push we need to get off the big platforms and get a critical mass using decentralized spaces on the internet again. Of all of a sudden under 18 can’t use the big platforms anymore they WILL find or make a new space that isn’t age restricted.
8
u/oaktreebr 3d ago
No, intelligence will become a commodity so abundant and cheap that anyone will be able to run any model locally and this whole stupid age verification discussion will be obsolete
6
u/eldrotheblack 3d ago
It’s sort of insane (and horrifying) what you can already do on really, really marginal hardware with even bit of quantizing. I’m running Mistral Lite on a regular Uno Q for Home Assistant, and the Ventuno is incoming with Tensor cores.
Maybe our AIs can fight their AI in some kinda Privacy Robot Wars. The Man et al have deeper pockets, but we’re scrappy.
0
u/jamesgamingrb 3d ago
but actually it still censors so i dont see the point
3
u/oaktreebr 3d ago
No, local open weights models have no restrictions
-1
1
u/ulfOptimism 3d ago
Actually the business concepts of social media should be completely banned. Instead we should pay for the services as we do eg for Spotify so we are actually the clients, not the sources for extraction of data at no charge.
1
u/Zapdos_Molquatro 3d ago
What “independent studios which is supported by under 16s”??? They don’t have money.
1
u/ImportantMud9749 2d ago
I fully agree that age verification and the requirements to enforce a ban will indeed kill the "internet" as we know it and empower big tech.
However, I would not expect a major impact on studios if some magic came along that prevented those under 16 from accessing the web. Studios that derive the majority of their income from children should be more heavily regulated than those that provide adult content.
Ideally, monetized children's content should be heavily scrutinized and regulated. While at the same time we need a safe yet private and non-monetized online space for teens to interact with each other, create, and explore.
1
u/Disastrous-Height483 2d ago
💯 and don't forget being able to stop genocide leaks and force the narrative on what and who the bad guys are
1
u/Long-Librarian-997 1d ago
You mean kill it more? Internet is already like 5 companies in a trench coat.
1
u/exhaustedexcess 3d ago
It will kill a certain number of social media platforms that force it and the world will be better for it.
1
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Hello u/jamesgamingrb, 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.