3 ms·

I agree, age verification on the web should 100% banned. Parents should learn how to be parents; the government shouldn't force companies to do parenting inste

by reddalo 5mo ago

I agree, age verification on the web should 100% banned. Parents should learn how to be parents; the government shouldn't force companies to do parenting instead.

eloisant 5mo ago
Governement should force companies to give parental controls tools. Gaming companies like Nintendo and Steam do that, I can create a kid account with parental controls. Social media companies (e.g. Meta, Snap) are the first that should provide that but they don't.
otabdeveloper4 5mo ago
So you're implying alcohol and cigarettes should be sold to children? (Not to mention all the other consent age laws.) That said, VPN is a national security issue, children are only a pretext.
- hnlmorg 5mo ago
  Children have always found ways to access age restricted consumables. Whether that was porno mags, alcohol or cigarettes. They’d just get an older sibling, or stranger to buy it. Or they’d have a fake ID. Or they’d just steal it from a family member. But you know which kids did this the least? It was the ones where their parents / guardians took their responsibilities as a guardian properly.
  - palata 5mo ago
    > Children have always found ways to access age restricted consumables Doesn't mean that it's equivalent to giving them free access to those consumables. > But you know which kids did this the least? Source?
    - hnlmorg 5mo ago
      > Doesn't mean that it's equivalent to giving them free access to those consumables. Why do people on HN always need to look at things as a Boolean state? It’s entirely reasonable to have some preventative measures but acknowledging that there are ways to circumvent them and accept that as a reasonable conclusion. Things don’t need to be “all or nothing” ;) > Source? I grew up pre-WWW. Literally lived and breathed the points I’m making. But don’t just take my word on this. Ask anyone of a certain age and they’ll tell you the same: they either tried cigarettes or knew lots of kids in school who smoked under the age of 16. They had access to alcohol under the age of 18. And pornographic content was easy to get hold of under the age of 18. The age at which they gained access and the frequency of the usage depended greatly on their upbringing.
      - palata 5mo ago
        > It’s entirely reasonable to have some preventative measures but acknowledging that there are ways to circumvent them and accept that as a reasonable conclusion. I totally agree. That can be used as an argument in favour of age verification, though.
        hnlmorg 5mo ago
        Sure, if you ignore the other part of my comment where I said parents should be responsible for the upbringing of their own children.
        palata 5mo ago
        I disagree with that part. Parents cannot be responsible for what other children can do. If all the children use social media, good luck preventing your kid from participating. "It's okay, just be completely disconnected from everything they share between each other, it's not important to socialise, you can make friends when you are old". The problem with social media is that it's not okay for one kid to be disconnected. What we want as a society is to prevent them all, so that they are all in the same situation.
        5mo ago
- esseph 5mo ago
  > VPN is a national security issue :/
- sensanaty 5mo ago
  What does national security even mean anymore? People are using this term for basically everything these days, as if saying "national security" is somehow a justification on its own. What "national security" implications are there with VPNs?
  - esseph 5mo ago
    > What "national security" implications are there with VPNs? Clearly, Big Government can't see what you or your company are doing and that's a problem for them.
  - Nasrudith 5mo ago
    "National security" has long been their favorite cheat code for 'do what I say, you can't question it, damn it!'. The boy who cried wolf has nothing on the old man who cried national security.
  - otabdeveloper4 5mo ago
    > What "national security" implications are there with VPNs? "Foreign agents" communicating in an untraceable way. All internet communication is wiretapped by default unless you use a VPN to a rival jurisdiction. (Where it's also wiretapped, but presumably the interplay of state actor interests comes up in the "foreign agent"'s favor.)
- ykonstant 5mo ago
  "So you're implying..." No.
gherkinnn 5mo ago
Band and severely punish systematic violations of privacy. Regulate the poison first, not the access to it. All this age verification nonsense is an admission that some platforms knowingly harm their users. And instead of fixing the issue by cracking down on the proverbial crack, governments make everybody's life worse. I remain hopeful that one day, humans will regard the online advertising companies with the same scorn we do the tobacco industry and may they be ashamed and disgusted at our inaction.

by reddalo 5mo ago

I agree, age verification on the web should 100% banned. Parents should learn how to be parents; the government shouldn't force companies to do parenting instead.

eloisant 5mo ago

Governement should force companies to give parental controls tools. Gaming companies like Nintendo and Steam do that, I can create a kid account with parental controls. Social media companies (e.g. Meta, Snap) are the first that should provide that but they don't.

otabdeveloper4 5mo ago

So you're implying alcohol and cigarettes should be sold to children? (Not to mention all the other consent age laws.) That said, VPN is a national security issue, children are only a pretext.

hnlmorg 5mo ago
Children have always found ways to access age restricted consumables. Whether that was porno mags, alcohol or cigarettes. They’d just get an older sibling, or stranger to buy it. Or they’d have a fake ID. Or they’d just steal it from a family member. But you know which kids did this the least? It was the ones where their parents / guardians took their responsibilities as a guardian properly.
- palata 5mo ago
  > Children have always found ways to access age restricted consumables Doesn't mean that it's equivalent to giving them free access to those consumables. > But you know which kids did this the least? Source?
  - hnlmorg 5mo ago
    > Doesn't mean that it's equivalent to giving them free access to those consumables. Why do people on HN always need to look at things as a Boolean state? It’s entirely reasonable to have some preventative measures but acknowledging that there are ways to circumvent them and accept that as a reasonable conclusion. Things don’t need to be “all or nothing” ;) > Source? I grew up pre-WWW. Literally lived and breathed the points I’m making. But don’t just take my word on this. Ask anyone of a certain age and they’ll tell you the same: they either tried cigarettes or knew lots of kids in school who smoked under the age of 16. They had access to alcohol under the age of 18. And pornographic content was easy to get hold of under the age of 18. The age at which they gained access and the frequency of the usage depended greatly on their upbringing.
    - palata 5mo ago
      > It’s entirely reasonable to have some preventative measures but acknowledging that there are ways to circumvent them and accept that as a reasonable conclusion. I totally agree. That can be used as an argument in favour of age verification, though.
      - hnlmorg 5mo ago
        Sure, if you ignore the other part of my comment where I said parents should be responsible for the upbringing of their own children.
        palata 5mo ago
        I disagree with that part. Parents cannot be responsible for what other children can do. If all the children use social media, good luck preventing your kid from participating. "It's okay, just be completely disconnected from everything they share between each other, it's not important to socialise, you can make friends when you are old". The problem with social media is that it's not okay for one kid to be disconnected. What we want as a society is to prevent them all, so that they are all in the same situation.
        5mo ago
esseph 5mo ago
> VPN is a national security issue :/
sensanaty 5mo ago
What does national security even mean anymore? People are using this term for basically everything these days, as if saying "national security" is somehow a justification on its own. What "national security" implications are there with VPNs?
- esseph 5mo ago
  > What "national security" implications are there with VPNs? Clearly, Big Government can't see what you or your company are doing and that's a problem for them.
- Nasrudith 5mo ago
  "National security" has long been their favorite cheat code for 'do what I say, you can't question it, damn it!'. The boy who cried wolf has nothing on the old man who cried national security.
- otabdeveloper4 5mo ago
  > What "national security" implications are there with VPNs? "Foreign agents" communicating in an untraceable way. All internet communication is wiretapped by default unless you use a VPN to a rival jurisdiction. (Where it's also wiretapped, but presumably the interplay of state actor interests comes up in the "foreign agent"'s favor.)
ykonstant 5mo ago
"So you're implying..." No.

gherkinnn 5mo ago

Band and severely punish systematic violations of privacy. Regulate the poison first, not the access to it. All this age verification nonsense is an admission that some platforms knowingly harm their users. And instead of fixing the issue by cracking down on the proverbial crack, governments make everybody's life worse. I remain hopeful that one day, humans will regard the online advertising companies with the same scorn we do the tobacco industry and may they be ashamed and disgusted at our inaction.