> Based on the few snippets quoted in the article, I think as written this bill gets closer to a good, privacy-preserving, non-authoritarian version of "age ver

> Based on the few snippets quoted in the article, I think as written this bill gets closer to a good, privacy-preserving, non-authoritarian version of "age verification" than any of the attempts so far. I think you are mixing up the bill this article is covering and the bill that California passed. The California law requires: • When setting up an account for a child who is the primary user of a device the OS lets the parent specify the child's age or birthday. • The OS to provide an API that apps can use to find out if the current user is a child and if so their age range (under 13, 13 but under 16, 16 but under 18, 18 or older). The bill in Congress requires setting age information for all users. It does not specify how that age information is to be obtained, leaving such details to regulations that the FTC will write.