4 ms·
Selecting an age choice from a drop down is in no way verification. The original post was low effort flame baiting. There's an argument to be made that it shou
by wredcoll 8mo ago
Selecting an age choice from a drop down is in no way verification.
The original post was low effort flame baiting. There's an argument to be made that it should be ignored, but it's hard to say.
- gatlin 8mo agoIf it must be ignored, then it exists. The bill proposes age verification. You may think the measures employed are weak or trivial, and I would agree, but the bill proposes age verification.
- wredcoll 8mo agoThe bill attempts to move age related signals from sending a scan of your passport to facebook to your own operating system attesting something.
- calf 8mo agoWhy do I keep proposing things but they fail to exist and I can't ignore my failures?
- gatlin 8mo agoThat sounds like a question for a psychologist or clergy member.
- wtallis 8mo agoYou seem to be operating with an unreasonably weak definition of "verification". What this bill is requiring is that app stores or operating systems ask for age information. Verification would mean doing something to verify the accuracy of the information provided, not merely receiving a response to the question. "Age verification" is not a synonym for "having age-based restrictions".
- gatlin 8mo agoNope, just the normal one. It asks for your age and gates further interactions based on the answer, no? That's verification.
- wtallis 8mo ago> and gates further interactions based on the answer No. The OS does literally nothing with the age information other than water it down to a few pre-defined age brackets and pass that on to applications. There's nothing in this law that says any action has to be denied. It's information collection and reporting, with no verification, accepting the information reported by the user as-is. The law does not require the information to be true or accurate, and explicitly removes liability from app developers when their users lie about their age. Even applications don't need to do anything with the age information, unless there's a different law already on the books saying something needs to be age-restricted. And in those cases, getting the information about whether to apply restrictions from the OS instead of however they're currently getting age information is not "verification". "Verification" necessarily implies at least two pieces of information or steps in the process: first, an assertion of something as fact, then something to confirm that fact. This law omits the second step. There's no confirmation.
- gatlin 8mo agoYou seem to be passionate about your pedantry and I'm not so sure whatever.
- eleventyseven 8mo agoHey gatlin, are you going to apologize for ignorantly mangling the definition of the word "verification"? Just delete your account.
- gatlin 8mo agoYou seem to be under the impression that you have authority over me. Fascinating.
- mistercheph 8mo agoAh we should be happy about a bad law because it's enforcement mechanism is weak? That's twice-bad: undermines the strength and meaning of Law, and aligns Law with the bad. When the law and it's execution are undermined and weak, it becomes the cudgel of fickle changing power, i.e. it is applied selectively and it means nothing to people except when they are being beat in the head with it, at which point they only regret having been caught, successfully undermining the social and political fabric of a nation. Having a bad law with a weak enforcement mechanism isn't quite the thing to be boasting about you seem to think it is.