3 ms·

That's the correct way to do it. Age should be something reported by browser/os/hardware. Something similar to User-Agent. I really hope this will end the whol

That's the correct way to do it. Age should be something reported by browser/os/hardware. Something similar to User-Agent. I really hope this will end the whole third party age verification farce.

isdononthephone 2mo ago
[flagged]
- raincole 2mo ago
  > Might as well have the children strap red rotating lights to their heads so the predators can more easily identify them in a crowd where they would otherwise blend in You... you think pedos can't identify children from their appearances alone? People really say the most random analogy for slightest chance to win online arguments...
  - isdononthephone 2mo ago
    [flagged]
- __del__ 2mo ago
  five minutes? it took me two minutes to come up with a threat: someone will serve an innocuous page to adults, and some malicious honeypot trickery to children, all based on an http header. "you've won five billion robux! click allow [to a webcam permission] to be able to receive them into your account!"
  - inigyou 2mo ago
    And then, if they're an identifiable company and the problem is widespread, they'll go to jail
csydas 2mo ago
it's not age verification laws have little to do with protecting anyone, and social media companies are attempting to remove themselves from liability for their dangerous product by pushing for it social media in its current unregulated state is harmful as has been demonstrated repeatedly with (suppressed) studies, and the push for age verification instead of regulation on the actual harmful content age verification will always be a tool to censor whatever content certain interest groups want to censor and it is a wild violation of privacy as has been repeatedly demonstrated every time an identity verification firm gets hacked, they do not take this seriously at all, and all the while the actual harmful sites continue to do harm and have the ability to blame others for not 'protecting' people from the harm their product causes it's a complete farce and has nothing to do with protecting anyone except tech companies peddling a harmful product
- Someone 2mo ago
  > the push for age verification instead of regulation on the actual harmful content _If_ you think there is content grown-ups should be able to see but kids shouldn’t be able to see without their parent’s consent, I don’t see what’s bad about this. I also think many Americans agree with that _If_.
- inigyou 2mo ago
  The social media company wouldn't be liable for not knowing someone's age but it would be liable if someone indicated as under-13 was shown porn or gambling ads or whatever they're trying to block. I see that as a win. Note there's no verification in this law. "Age verification" is a deliberate misnomer.
bezier-curve 2mo ago
Maybe we could have privacy protections before assuming every adult in the US is a child until giving random companies our PII? That would be cool, but not holding my breath. Edit: of course, downvote the comment pointing to Americans having more civil rights. Expect nothing less from the HN techbro cesspool. And yes, this meta commentary infringes the guidelines, and the trust contract is broken at this point. This site does not deserve my energy anymore.
- inigyou 2mo ago
  No PII is transmitted to the companies because of this law.
spockz 2mo ago
It could be part of the Accept header which already indicates language. It could serve as a signal that you only want to see content that is appropriate for that age bracket. Where appropriate means what the site wants to serve according to the laws of their jurisdiction. But to require OS to implement all of this goes way to far and together with the proposed verification mechanisms is a privacy nightmare.
- lern_too_spel 2mo ago
  There are no proposed verification mechanisms in Illinois. This is purely a consolidation of parental controls.
hackable_sand 2mo ago
Remember. We should do absolutely everything in our power to not hold these companies responsible.
- hackinthebochs 2mo ago
  What does "hold these companies responsible" look like to you? I see a lot of empty rhetoric without things being spelled out. If you just want these companies to not exist, just say that.
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
  - hackable_sand 2mo ago
    Remember. Keep your standards in the basement. We'll dust them off when someone dies.
gblargg 2mo ago
Might as well put your real name and DOB in there.

That's the correct way to do it. Age should be something reported by browser/os/hardware. Something similar to User-Agent. I really hope this will end the whole third party age verification farce.

isdononthephone 2mo ago

[flagged]

raincole 2mo ago
> Might as well have the children strap red rotating lights to their heads so the predators can more easily identify them in a crowd where they would otherwise blend in You... you think pedos can't identify children from their appearances alone? People really say the most random analogy for slightest chance to win online arguments...
- isdononthephone 2mo ago
  [flagged]
__del__ 2mo ago
five minutes? it took me two minutes to come up with a threat: someone will serve an innocuous page to adults, and some malicious honeypot trickery to children, all based on an http header. "you've won five billion robux! click allow [to a webcam permission] to be able to receive them into your account!"
- inigyou 2mo ago
  And then, if they're an identifiable company and the problem is widespread, they'll go to jail

csydas 2mo ago

it's not age verification laws have little to do with protecting anyone, and social media companies are attempting to remove themselves from liability for their dangerous product by pushing for it social media in its current unregulated state is harmful as has been demonstrated repeatedly with (suppressed) studies, and the push for age verification instead of regulation on the actual harmful content age verification will always be a tool to censor whatever content certain interest groups want to censor and it is a wild violation of privacy as has been repeatedly demonstrated every time an identity verification firm gets hacked, they do not take this seriously at all, and all the while the actual harmful sites continue to do harm and have the ability to blame others for not 'protecting' people from the harm their product causes it's a complete farce and has nothing to do with protecting anyone except tech companies peddling a harmful product

Someone 2mo ago
> the push for age verification instead of regulation on the actual harmful content _If_ you think there is content grown-ups should be able to see but kids shouldn’t be able to see without their parent’s consent, I don’t see what’s bad about this. I also think many Americans agree with that _If_.
inigyou 2mo ago
The social media company wouldn't be liable for not knowing someone's age but it would be liable if someone indicated as under-13 was shown porn or gambling ads or whatever they're trying to block. I see that as a win. Note there's no verification in this law. "Age verification" is a deliberate misnomer.

bezier-curve 2mo ago

Maybe we could have privacy protections before assuming every adult in the US is a child until giving random companies our PII? That would be cool, but not holding my breath. Edit: of course, downvote the comment pointing to Americans having more civil rights. Expect nothing less from the HN techbro cesspool. And yes, this meta commentary infringes the guidelines, and the trust contract is broken at this point. This site does not deserve my energy anymore.

inigyou 2mo ago
No PII is transmitted to the companies because of this law.

spockz 2mo ago

It could be part of the Accept header which already indicates language. It could serve as a signal that you only want to see content that is appropriate for that age bracket. Where appropriate means what the site wants to serve according to the laws of their jurisdiction. But to require OS to implement all of this goes way to far and together with the proposed verification mechanisms is a privacy nightmare.

lern_too_spel 2mo ago
There are no proposed verification mechanisms in Illinois. This is purely a consolidation of parental controls.

hackable_sand 2mo ago

Remember. We should do absolutely everything in our power to not hold these companies responsible.

hackinthebochs 2mo ago
What does "hold these companies responsible" look like to you? I see a lot of empty rhetoric without things being spelled out. If you just want these companies to not exist, just say that.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- hackable_sand 2mo ago
  Remember. Keep your standards in the basement. We'll dust them off when someone dies.

gblargg 2mo ago

Might as well put your real name and DOB in there.