Why do you think that a website asking how old you are and politicians reading your private messages are the same thing?

▲

mdp2021 a day ago | parent [-]

How do you prove your age without either sharing your identity (or using twisted ways entailing other possibly unacceptable compromises like the eu is trying to do).

Remember that the australian side (which moved first) framed it as "no underage access to encyclopedias, no underage access to search engines": age verification, i.e. identity verification or other "nonsense" to access encyclopedias and search engines. In the USA, some voices would include LLMs. Remember that in the uk Wikipedia had to win against the state to get exception under the mandate from keir starmer - it "exceptionally won", and after having lost at a first stage.

The privacy of online browsing and the privacy of messaging are equally critical, yes.

(Edit: if you wish to really rank them, then a guy looking behind your shoulders when you are reading a book is more dystopian and farcical than a guy looking behind your shoulders when you are writing a letter - yes.)

▲

inigyou a day ago | parent [-]

You don't prove it. Under California AB1043 (often called the "age verification law" by propagandists) it's illegal for a social media website to demand you to prove your age.

▲

mdp2021 a day ago | parent [-]

> Under California AB1043

We are talking about "Brits" here. But you seem to be stating that California has tackled the issue and deliberated that - do I understand correctly? - somebody installs an OS on a machine and sets manually, without verification, a date of birth for the user (setting that will be shared with relevant servers).

Are you sure that that would be the way Britain is going to implement it? Why have not britons raised to get that crucial detail very, very clear? We understood that past limitations involved people using webcams in the uk to access forbidden sites.

And the eu? That Californian decision does not seem to have conditioned the eu much: the eu idea is that you should have an "official OS" with the technical capabilities required by the open source age-verifying "app" to get access.

(And I would insist: forbidding access to the video museum to those in the formative age is one of the most blatant events in history. That happened in britain, it just happened. To call the world reaction disproportionately absent is an understatement.)

▲

inigyou a day ago | parent [-]

If we want a good thing we should push for the good thing instead of remaining silent while worse people push for the worse thing.

▲

mdp2021 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Not clear. What would be the good thing. And what is "we", what is that silence: I denounce that of the britons as a set. We are pretty vocal.

The good thing to push is demanding decent administrations and operators (e.g. in information systems), selected from and evaluated by decent neighborhoods.

	▲	inigyou 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		sorry that's not a coherent thought