4 ms·

Maybe better, but still doesn't address the underlying problem. Governments print bits of paper and citizens need to scan and upload them to be validated by a 3

by stubish 8mo ago

Maybe better, but still doesn't address the underlying problem. Governments print bits of paper and citizens need to scan and upload them to be validated by a 3rd party. Lots of obvious waste there. Legislating this approach is just entrenching it. But I guess it is cheap for the government. Sane approaches require the government provide a service which 3rd parties can query age with (indirectly, via anonymizing proxy). No need for those bits of paper to be involved at all, disclosing far too much information.

wqaatwt 8mo ago
> Lots of obvious waste there Seems like a great thing then. People get annoyed, businesses that comply lose customers and money etc. All that friction means these policies become inherently less popular regardless of anything else. While this crap work effortlessly out of the box is just outright dystopian
- stubish 8mo ago
  People are already annoyed, which is why society is demanding the stuff already age restricted for decades or even centuries actually be restricted on the Internet. The battle has never and will never be about allowing kids free access to porn. The battle is about restricting it in a way that doesn't endanger them or their privacy. Failing to do that is what ends in a dystopia, where tech and governments use society's demands as an excuse to move us further into a surveillance state. Like the proposed laws being discussed, centralizing data in an easily subpoenable location.
  - Hizonner 8mo ago
    "Society" isn't demanding anything. A vocal minority of idiots, unfortunately overrepresented among the kind of people who tend to run for office, is demanding things, 95 percent based on stupid delusions and childish prejudices.
tzs 8mo ago
> Sane approaches require the government provide a service which 3rd parties can query age with (indirectly, via anonymizing proxy) The problem with that is that the government obtained logs from the 3rd parties they might be able to compare timestamps with the timestamps of the anonymous age queries and figure out what sites some people were logging into.

by stubish 8mo ago

wqaatwt 8mo ago

> Lots of obvious waste there Seems like a great thing then. People get annoyed, businesses that comply lose customers and money etc. All that friction means these policies become inherently less popular regardless of anything else. While this crap work effortlessly out of the box is just outright dystopian

stubish 8mo ago
People are already annoyed, which is why society is demanding the stuff already age restricted for decades or even centuries actually be restricted on the Internet. The battle has never and will never be about allowing kids free access to porn. The battle is about restricting it in a way that doesn't endanger them or their privacy. Failing to do that is what ends in a dystopia, where tech and governments use society's demands as an excuse to move us further into a surveillance state. Like the proposed laws being discussed, centralizing data in an easily subpoenable location.
- Hizonner 8mo ago
  "Society" isn't demanding anything. A vocal minority of idiots, unfortunately overrepresented among the kind of people who tend to run for office, is demanding things, 95 percent based on stupid delusions and childish prejudices.

tzs 8mo ago

> Sane approaches require the government provide a service which 3rd parties can query age with (indirectly, via anonymizing proxy) The problem with that is that the government obtained logs from the 3rd parties they might be able to compare timestamps with the timestamps of the anonymous age queries and figure out what sites some people were logging into.