6 ms·

> Age verification should be banned Why? > They already got so much data on their users There are a variety of ways (see "Verifiable Credentials") that ages

by Nursie 8mo ago

> Age verification should be banned Why? > They already got so much data on their users There are a variety of ways (see "Verifiable Credentials") that ages can be verified without handing over any data other than "Is old enough" to social media services.

echelon 8mo ago
It's a slippery slope. This is the next two steps into 1984. Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs. (Wait, we already do that, right?)
- sham1 8mo ago
  The Party doesn't care about the Proles, only the members of the Outer Party. I think that it's rather funny that people like to appeal to 1984 as if the only point of Mr. Orwell was that surveillance is bad, missing the entire point about stuff like the control of the language or the idea that the only self-justification of the (Inner) Party is power for the sake of power (see also: The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism). I'd even go as far as to say that if "telescreens are horrible" is the only thing that someone takes away from 1984, they've frankly missed the point.
  - fragmede 8mo ago
    Unfortunately, having totally missed the point, they still get the same number of votes as you do.
- Nursie 8mo ago
  > It's a slippery slope. Is it? I thought that was a logical fallacy? > This is the next two steps into 1984. How so? > Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. > The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs. Could you provide some more details on why you think this? For a start I talked about a scheme in which you don't hand over ID.
  - consp 8mo ago
    Slippery slope can be argumental if you provide the actual argumental reasoning for it as I was thought it could be used as deductive argumentation (though that does not say much). On itself it is a fallacy. I don't see how verifiable credentials with zero knowledge proofs provide that however.
- drawfloat 8mo ago
  Read another book.
shakna 8mo ago
Age verification obliviates anonymity on the internet. If everything you do, _can_ be tracked by the government, it _will_ be. Allowing for more effective propaganda, electrol control, and lights a fire on the concept of a government _representing_ anyone.
- Almondsetat 8mo ago
  Ok, and? Presenting your ID at a number of IRL estamblishments also heavily reduces anonymity
  - gschizas 8mo ago
    The difference is that IRL establishments don't sell off that data to anyone else, nor do they have the ability to collate that data with data from other establishments to make a profile of you. (at least not yet)
    - fragmede 8mo ago
      If you think the nightclub that scans your driver's license magstripe isn't selling your data off, when they could be making money off of it? Between PatronScan,Intellicheck, Scantek, and TokenWorks, yeah a dingy bar where it's a dude visually checking isn't it, but a nightclub and quick swipe totally is.
  - shakna 8mo ago
    But to get that ID from the bottleo, you need to hold them at gunpoint. To get it from Discord you need to sneeze. The internet has scale and availability, that physical locations do not.
- Nursie 8mo ago
  > Age verification obliviates anonymity on the internet. How so? Please explain in detail, because there are already schemes such as "verifiable credentials" which allow people to prove they are of age without handing over ID to online services.
pjc50 8mo ago
The problem with this discussion is that this is a wonk solution for wonkish times. You're trying to thread the needle between various reasonable compromises. Ironically due to social media, that is simply not how politics and lawmaking works any more. Instead it's an emotionally driven fight between various different sorts of moral panic, and the only option is to get people more mad about surveillance than "think of the children". You might be able to get somewhere by getting a tech company on your side, but they generally also hate adult content and don't mind banning it entirely. (people are not going to get age verification _banned_ any time soon! That's simply not going to happen!)
- Nursie 8mo ago
  > You might be able to get somewhere by getting a tech company on your side There are quite a few already looking at this, some in the context of providing secure verification services for the existing and upcoming social media bans etc. Unfortunately I agree with you on the rest - facts and pragmatism have fallen by the wayside compared to feels and shouting.

by Nursie 8mo ago

echelon 8mo ago

It's a slippery slope. This is the next two steps into 1984. Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs. (Wait, we already do that, right?)

sham1 8mo ago
The Party doesn't care about the Proles, only the members of the Outer Party. I think that it's rather funny that people like to appeal to 1984 as if the only point of Mr. Orwell was that surveillance is bad, missing the entire point about stuff like the control of the language or the idea that the only self-justification of the (Inner) Party is power for the sake of power (see also: The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism). I'd even go as far as to say that if "telescreens are horrible" is the only thing that someone takes away from 1984, they've frankly missed the point.
- fragmede 8mo ago
  Unfortunately, having totally missed the point, they still get the same number of votes as you do.
Nursie 8mo ago
> It's a slippery slope. Is it? I thought that was a logical fallacy? > This is the next two steps into 1984. How so? > Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. > The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs. Could you provide some more details on why you think this? For a start I talked about a scheme in which you don't hand over ID.
- consp 8mo ago
  Slippery slope can be argumental if you provide the actual argumental reasoning for it as I was thought it could be used as deductive argumentation (though that does not say much). On itself it is a fallacy. I don't see how verifiable credentials with zero knowledge proofs provide that however.
drawfloat 8mo ago
Read another book.

shakna 8mo ago

Age verification obliviates anonymity on the internet. If everything you do, _can_ be tracked by the government, it _will_ be. Allowing for more effective propaganda, electrol control, and lights a fire on the concept of a government _representing_ anyone.

Almondsetat 8mo ago
Ok, and? Presenting your ID at a number of IRL estamblishments also heavily reduces anonymity
- gschizas 8mo ago
  The difference is that IRL establishments don't sell off that data to anyone else, nor do they have the ability to collate that data with data from other establishments to make a profile of you. (at least not yet)
  - fragmede 8mo ago
    If you think the nightclub that scans your driver's license magstripe isn't selling your data off, when they could be making money off of it? Between PatronScan,Intellicheck, Scantek, and TokenWorks, yeah a dingy bar where it's a dude visually checking isn't it, but a nightclub and quick swipe totally is.
- shakna 8mo ago
  But to get that ID from the bottleo, you need to hold them at gunpoint. To get it from Discord you need to sneeze. The internet has scale and availability, that physical locations do not.
Nursie 8mo ago
> Age verification obliviates anonymity on the internet. How so? Please explain in detail, because there are already schemes such as "verifiable credentials" which allow people to prove they are of age without handing over ID to online services.

pjc50 8mo ago

The problem with this discussion is that this is a wonk solution for wonkish times. You're trying to thread the needle between various reasonable compromises. Ironically due to social media, that is simply not how politics and lawmaking works any more. Instead it's an emotionally driven fight between various different sorts of moral panic, and the only option is to get people more mad about surveillance than "think of the children". You might be able to get somewhere by getting a tech company on your side, but they generally also hate adult content and don't mind banning it entirely. (people are not going to get age verification _banned_ any time soon! That's simply not going to happen!)

Nursie 8mo ago
> You might be able to get somewhere by getting a tech company on your side There are quite a few already looking at this, some in the context of providing secure verification services for the existing and upcoming social media bans etc. Unfortunately I agree with you on the rest - facts and pragmatism have fallen by the wayside compared to feels and shouting.