5 ms·

Government issued versus corporate issued age verification is a false dichotomy. There are other options, such as refusing games that require them. (Yes, we do

by em500 2mo ago

Government issued versus corporate issued age verification is a false dichotomy. There are other options, such as refusing games that require them. (Yes, we do have a teen, and yes we did exactly that with Roblox.)

jstummbillig 2mo ago
Pretending that those options are equal is a false dichotomy. Not participating is an option up to a point, and then it is increasingly limiting all other options.
- hnisnotbenign 2mo ago
  [flagged]
  - ____mr____ 2mo ago
    We will see how optional it is to not participate in age verification when software used for interfacing with the world (such as bank apps or similar) require you to use age verification. On top of this, barring your children from apps requiring it is just going to socially isolate them from their peers. The fact of the matter is that if we want companies to be accountable for the pedophiles on their platform, they simply have to enforce some privacy invasive policies.
    - hnisnotbenign 2mo ago
      [dead]
joe_mamba 2mo ago
>There are other options, such as refusing games that require them. How about the option of the state not being so tyrannical in meddling about what people anonymously do online in their free time?
- zeta0134 2mo ago
  This is generally my opinion, and goodness it's swung around quite a bit. This entire debate feels like it should be solved by adequate parental controls. To the extent that it matters, I think the missing link here is "primary education should support a parent's intent to limit unrestricted internet access for their children." That is, during school activities where internet use is unavoidable, require supervision. (Maybe a lab monitor that can roam the room and see screens?) And for homework, don't assume the kid has internet access, because that is the parent's choice, and they may well not. On the flip side, if the parent trusts their kid with that access, or intends for them to learn through real world experience, let them. That should not be the state's decision. The problem of course is that this idea in my head is a pipe dream. Schools seem to be well onboard with digital coursework, presumably for efficiency reasons? Unclear. I'm not sure what a more practical middle ground actually looks like.
  - alistairSH 2mo ago
    You think most of the unsupervised internet time is happening at school? I mean, maybe it is, but that's an assertion I haven't seen before.
    - zeta0134 2mo ago
      Truthfully, I don't know! Especially for younger kids though, there's usually at least an adult in the room, right? Even when they're visiting a friend, the other parent is there to step in and check on them occasionally? I guess once you hand your teenager a smart phone (and all their friends have one too!) all bets are off. That's new, and wasn't a thing when I grew up. We were rural and on the tail end of dial-up, so I couldn't get online at home without someone hearing the modem. That sure limited my attempts to do so without permission!
  - inigyou 2mo ago
    The California Digital Age Assurance Act is a law mandating adequate parental controls. And it's a great law that should be copied instead of doing the verification nonsense.
skrebbel 2mo ago
Fwiw we did that with Roblox too, but I hate it because Roblox Studio was a pretty damn fun collaborative gamedev experience. I mean his classmates argue with their parents about whether they can install TikTok (and most parents lose). Meanwhile I’m denying my son the right to make a game together with a friend. It’s so creative and so educative and I’m saying no to it. It sucks and I hate Roblox for making something so cool and then taking it away for such stupid reasons. I’d happily pay a license fee or sth. But I’m not gonna let them scan my son’s face.
- Pfhortune 2mo ago
  There's plenty of ways to make games outside of Roblox. Maybe they could sit down together and work through some Löve2D or Godot tutorials? No one can take that away arbitrarily
  - derefr 2mo ago
    I think GP meant “collaboratively” as in collaborating online through the game itself. The same way you might e.g. collaborate on a Google Doc. “Sit down together” might be impractical here, if GP’s child’s friends are e.g. friends they made before a move, who are thus quite far away physically. Or friends with snobby parents who won’t let them come over to GP’s house for whatever dumb reason. Or friends with extra-curriculars such that their free time never lines up with GP’s kid’s free time—meaning that only async collaboration will work. (That’s just a steelman position, though; in general I agree.)
    - skrebbel 2mo ago
      You are correct. And they do sit down together. Hours of ridiculous ideas flowing, and then when they go back home they can continue working on it. Or, well, they could until recently. This thread is like me complaining Google face-scan-gated Google Docs and people are saying “he can just sit down with the friend and learn LaTeX together!” Yeah, no.
  - skrebbel 2mo ago
    Neither multiplayer gamedevving nor multiplayer game playing are supported as well by either of these. Fwiw he does Godot too. It’s fun, but it’s purely solo. Godot’s answer to collaboration is Git, which is a complete non-starter for a 13yo. Note, I don’t judge them for it, they compete with Unity, not with Roblox.
wonderwonder 2mo ago
Thats obviously fine to do but it is very much going to have consequences for some kids. My kids spend hours a week playing roblox with their IRL friends. 10 - 15 kids on a group call on speaker phone all logged into the same code laughing and yelling for a couple hours a night. If I was to suddenly tell them that they can't play those games with their friends it would have very real effects on their social life. My kids spend a ton of time outside with friends but to ignore that they also spend time gaming with them is not an option.
- capitainenemo 2mo ago
  Self-hosting a minecraft server is still an option. And tons of customisability there and you aren't turning everything over to a centralised server.
  - djaro 2mo ago
    but the other kids are playing roblox, not minecraft
    - hnisnotbenign 2mo ago
      [flagged]
    - account42 2mo ago
      And if the other kids were jumping off of bridges would you also want your kid to not miss out on that socialization?
      - Peaches4Rent 2mo ago
        If the other kids are jumping off bridges, I would have a great reason to tie my kid to the house. But this isn't that obvious to kids. They will be resentful, they will hate your guts. This will have lasting consequences to your relationship
      - wonderwonder 2mo ago

by em500 2mo ago

jstummbillig 2mo ago

Pretending that those options are equal is a false dichotomy. Not participating is an option up to a point, and then it is increasingly limiting all other options.

hnisnotbenign 2mo ago
[flagged]
- ____mr____ 2mo ago
  We will see how optional it is to not participate in age verification when software used for interfacing with the world (such as bank apps or similar) require you to use age verification. On top of this, barring your children from apps requiring it is just going to socially isolate them from their peers. The fact of the matter is that if we want companies to be accountable for the pedophiles on their platform, they simply have to enforce some privacy invasive policies.
  - hnisnotbenign 2mo ago
    [dead]

joe_mamba 2mo ago

>There are other options, such as refusing games that require them. How about the option of the state not being so tyrannical in meddling about what people anonymously do online in their free time?

zeta0134 2mo ago
This is generally my opinion, and goodness it's swung around quite a bit. This entire debate feels like it should be solved by adequate parental controls. To the extent that it matters, I think the missing link here is "primary education should support a parent's intent to limit unrestricted internet access for their children." That is, during school activities where internet use is unavoidable, require supervision. (Maybe a lab monitor that can roam the room and see screens?) And for homework, don't assume the kid has internet access, because that is the parent's choice, and they may well not. On the flip side, if the parent trusts their kid with that access, or intends for them to learn through real world experience, let them. That should not be the state's decision. The problem of course is that this idea in my head is a pipe dream. Schools seem to be well onboard with digital coursework, presumably for efficiency reasons? Unclear. I'm not sure what a more practical middle ground actually looks like.
- alistairSH 2mo ago
  You think most of the unsupervised internet time is happening at school? I mean, maybe it is, but that's an assertion I haven't seen before.
  - zeta0134 2mo ago
    Truthfully, I don't know! Especially for younger kids though, there's usually at least an adult in the room, right? Even when they're visiting a friend, the other parent is there to step in and check on them occasionally? I guess once you hand your teenager a smart phone (and all their friends have one too!) all bets are off. That's new, and wasn't a thing when I grew up. We were rural and on the tail end of dial-up, so I couldn't get online at home without someone hearing the modem. That sure limited my attempts to do so without permission!
- inigyou 2mo ago
  The California Digital Age Assurance Act is a law mandating adequate parental controls. And it's a great law that should be copied instead of doing the verification nonsense.

skrebbel 2mo ago

Fwiw we did that with Roblox too, but I hate it because Roblox Studio was a pretty damn fun collaborative gamedev experience. I mean his classmates argue with their parents about whether they can install TikTok (and most parents lose). Meanwhile I’m denying my son the right to make a game together with a friend. It’s so creative and so educative and I’m saying no to it. It sucks and I hate Roblox for making something so cool and then taking it away for such stupid reasons. I’d happily pay a license fee or sth. But I’m not gonna let them scan my son’s face.

Pfhortune 2mo ago
There's plenty of ways to make games outside of Roblox. Maybe they could sit down together and work through some Löve2D or Godot tutorials? No one can take that away arbitrarily
- derefr 2mo ago
  I think GP meant “collaboratively” as in collaborating online through the game itself. The same way you might e.g. collaborate on a Google Doc. “Sit down together” might be impractical here, if GP’s child’s friends are e.g. friends they made before a move, who are thus quite far away physically. Or friends with snobby parents who won’t let them come over to GP’s house for whatever dumb reason. Or friends with extra-curriculars such that their free time never lines up with GP’s kid’s free time—meaning that only async collaboration will work. (That’s just a steelman position, though; in general I agree.)
  - skrebbel 2mo ago
    You are correct. And they do sit down together. Hours of ridiculous ideas flowing, and then when they go back home they can continue working on it. Or, well, they could until recently. This thread is like me complaining Google face-scan-gated Google Docs and people are saying “he can just sit down with the friend and learn LaTeX together!” Yeah, no.
- skrebbel 2mo ago
  Neither multiplayer gamedevving nor multiplayer game playing are supported as well by either of these. Fwiw he does Godot too. It’s fun, but it’s purely solo. Godot’s answer to collaboration is Git, which is a complete non-starter for a 13yo. Note, I don’t judge them for it, they compete with Unity, not with Roblox.

wonderwonder 2mo ago

Thats obviously fine to do but it is very much going to have consequences for some kids. My kids spend hours a week playing roblox with their IRL friends. 10 - 15 kids on a group call on speaker phone all logged into the same code laughing and yelling for a couple hours a night. If I was to suddenly tell them that they can't play those games with their friends it would have very real effects on their social life. My kids spend a ton of time outside with friends but to ignore that they also spend time gaming with them is not an option.

capitainenemo 2mo ago
Self-hosting a minecraft server is still an option. And tons of customisability there and you aren't turning everything over to a centralised server.
- djaro 2mo ago
  but the other kids are playing roblox, not minecraft
  - hnisnotbenign 2mo ago
    [flagged]
  - account42 2mo ago
    And if the other kids were jumping off of bridges would you also want your kid to not miss out on that socialization?
    - Peaches4Rent 2mo ago
      If the other kids are jumping off bridges, I would have a great reason to tie my kid to the house. But this isn't that obvious to kids. They will be resentful, they will hate your guts. This will have lasting consequences to your relationship
    - wonderwonder 2mo ago