Remix.run Logo
Remix clone Hacker News
new | show | ask | jobsGithub
▲ panny 3 hours ago

Mass surveillance is bad, until I'm in charge of it. -- Parents demanding "age verification" laws

▲vlian2088 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>Parents demanding "age verification" laws

I keep seeing this claim, but where is it coming from?

▲pixl97 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think part of it has been that parents have been sold the 'only way' is age verification laws. As part of being a parent you're responsible for what your child does, even online. But monitoring everything they do is nearly impossible as kids are pretty sharp and will find that friend whos parents let them do anything and use their electronic devices. This presents itself as a 'valid' solution for the type of people that don't think about the ramifications of it. I mean, we have to have ID to buy cigs and alcohol and numerous other things, so why would this be bad?

▲beached_whale 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This parent wants a form of that that doesn't require identity disclosure. Like zero trust assertions. Without that, the risks are too high.

▲esikich 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Just talk to an average person rather than a tech nerd.

▲vlian2088 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't think asking the average person whether they would consent to constantly have their face scanned to access the Internet would yield the result you believe it would, no matter the excuse.

"parents" are not do-I-look-like-I-know-what-a-jay-peg-is boomers you and others who make this claim believe them to be. the people who are having children now grew up with iPhones. to them, the Internet is not that newfangled thang they heard about on CNN/Fox.

so, show me the data. not a poll with vague ass questions like "are you concerned about your children's safety on the Internet?". I want to see the percentage of people who answer yes to an unambiguous question like "do you consent to submit your ID and/or scan your face to access any random website ~~to fight terrorisds~~ ~~to protect our democracy~~ to protect your children?"

▲esikich 2 hours ago | parent [-]

"Won't somebody think of the children" is as old as time and works. That's why it's used so often. If it were ineffective at convincing people to give up their rights, it wouldn't be a thing.

▲vlian2088 an hour ago | parent [-]

and what I'm saying is that I'm not seeing the data to back up that claim.

California, for example, has all those propositions they vote on, about various things they're allowed to decide. the recent age verification bullshit, however, doesn't seem to have been put up to a vote.

▲sph 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not parents demanding 'age verification' laws.

▲gruez 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's not supported by the polling.

>From everything you have seen and heard, do you support or oppose the recent rules requiring age verification to access websites that may contain pornographic material?*

>80% support

https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/52693-how-have-britons-rea...

>The Essential poll found majority support for a range reforms to improve online safety including: [...] enforcing age verifications for pornography and gambling sites (79%); enforcing age verification for social media (76%)

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/may/...

▲john_strinlai 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

it really difficult to take this polling at face value. average people typically hear only one side of the argument: "age verification will stop kids from accessing harmful sites".

they don't hear about all of the potential downsides, knock-on effects, chilling effects, etc. unless they are part of niche groups like HN. and even if they do, in passing, they often lack the technical knowledge to really understand the implications.

i.e., they are consenting, but it isn't informed consent.

i imagine there would be an interesting picture if these numbers were presented in buckets by occupation, or by results in tech competency test, etc.

(similarly, as an example, my opinion in a poll about some complex medical procedure would not be very informed. i would be relying solely on what i hear on the news or read in a quick article, with no fundamentals to really assess and form an opinion of my own)

▲amarant 3 hours ago | parent [-]

This is a problem with current implementations of democracy. It's free elections, but it's not informed elections. The average voter has very little clue about what they are voting for. Arguably it's impossible to know in a representative democracy.

Not that I know how to do it better, but it's definitely an issue, possibly one that could be solved somehow.

▲diordiderot an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There was no option to select no!

Only which age you wanted the ban to start

▲gruez an hour ago | parent [-]

See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48674572

▲xyzzy_plugh 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Support is not the same thing as demand.

▲gruez 3 hours ago | parent [-]

That just seems like a cheap way to wriggle out of any inconvenient poll numbers. Most people support access to abortion? Well how many people actually demand it? Most people support medicare for all? Well how many people actually demand it?

▲xyzzy_plugh 2 hours ago | parent [-]

[dead]

▲antipurist 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Are you quoting the same polls that simply didn't offer respondents any way to say "I'm against all of it"?

Dishonest polls do not demonstrate popular support.

https://consumerrights.wiki/w/User:Louis/Manufacturing_suppo...

▲gruez 2 hours ago | parent [-]

>Are you quoting the same polls that simply didn't offer respondents any way to say "I'm against all of it"?

https://essentialreport.com.au/reports/07-may-2024

▲PxldLtd 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This feels a bit out of touch. These policies have a lot of public support here in the UK. All of our parent friends are lauding it despite my complaints.

▲kodisha 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What story are they telling them self to justify this?

▲mhitza 3 hours ago | parent [-]

By ignoring key implementation details. That's what has been happening in Romania with this topic for the last year.

Constant polling and reporting of opinion, and always phrased in terms of effect instead of how they aim to do so.

Once properly informed "do you want to go through an ID check on all websites and apps that you use?" people wise up quickly to the issue. But state sponsored media is pretty adamant about moving this topic forward.

▲ryan_n 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You sure about that? The average person couldn't care less about privacy and would gladly hand over a significant amount of data to whatever company asks. The sentiment on hacker news isn't the norm.

▲noosphr 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, I really want pedophiles to know just how old my kids are.

▲basket_horse 3 hours ago | parent [-]

lol as if they don’t have a birth certificate already

▲dismalaf 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It's not shown on the internet. Age verification laws essentially broadcast it.

▲naruhodo 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I think the basket_horse comment is referring to the US government.

▲dismalaf 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The previous comment only says pedophiles so I don't think I'm wrong in assuming they're just talking about pedophiles online.