94
Obviously not, but it's not like they're gonna be honest and call it the UK Online Spying Act.
I saw an interesting video suggesting that the real motivation is to give megacorps like Google a new business acting as "banks" for identity, i.e. the Internet would get so inconvenient that people would just save their identity with Google (or Meta, etc) and then use them to log in to other websites.
I probably explained it badly, but the video I saw is here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAd-OOrdyMw
People in the comments pointed out that those companies would also have the ability to delete or suspend your identity verification if you did something they didn't like (or refused to do something they wanted). Reminds me of the SIN from Shadowrun .
Indeed. Anybody but the biggies will have an impossible task trying to convince people to verify their ID, so all the smaller sites will switch to only allowing registration/sign-in through Google/Apple/MS's Oauth, and depreciate the username/password option. When "signing in with Google/whatever", Google will simply pass a flag "adult" along with authorizing. In the end, they become the gatekeepers for the whole web, collecting tremendous valuable data in the process and gaining even more power over your identity.
Always keep in mind that the small players will always take the easiest option, and the big players want more control.
The other part is that christofascists really want to ban "porn" (read: anything they don't like), and they know age verification will make their operation almost impossible. The fact that corporations like Google might get to validate people they advertise to is a positive side effect.
This isn't the motivation in Europe where there's a deep skepticism about those - all foreign - companies.
There is no need for conspiracy-type thinking. "Think of the children" has always been a powerful and real motivating force, not just a cover for nefarious other stuff. You need to recognise that, even if it's wrong-headed.
It being a real and powerful motivational force means it's one of the more useful covers.
Just because it motivates the voters/customers doesn't mean it's the genuine reason behind a decision.
I cannot think of a single recent "think of the children" based action that was intended to and actually helped the children in a meaningful way.
Can you?
I cannot think of a single recent “think of the children” based action that was intended to and actually helped the children in a meaningful way.
Are you judging the motivation purely based on the effects? Otherwise, how are you working out what goes on inside people's heads?
I think given that we all agree that there are voters who think this will protect children makes it crazy to think that politicians must somehow know better. It is well-accepted online that politicians are out-of-touch when it comes to technology, so it's not like they understand the subject of this article.
politicians must somehow know better.
No, no, the accusation is that politicians are lying.
Let's phrase this another way. Asking every single website in existence to implement and maintain an ID database and monitoring system is expensive, yes? So, why wouldn't private companies shift some of this responsibility off to a 3rd party who specializes specifically in this service?
If I were google, I would:
- One, be very excited about tying a user's account analytics to their government personhood; can't multiple-credit-cards your way out of that one.
- And two, already be looking at my own 3rd-party user login service as a means of beating out all competition in this space.
The only thing left to do is lobby. Politicians might not have this vision, but they do understand really expensive dinners.
Are you judging the motivation purely based on the effects? Otherwise, how are you working out what goes on inside people’s heads?
A combination of the effects, the prior actions, reactions and consequences of the subject and others in similar categories/contexts (to the extent i actually know/pay attention).
I don't know of another way of performing predictive analysis.
Also that didn't answer the question.
I think given that we all agree that there are voters who think this will protect children makes it crazy to think that politicians must somehow know better. It is well-accepted online that politicians are out-of-touch when it comes to technology, so it’s not like they understand the subject of this article.
I'm genuinely not sure what you are saying here, but i'll go line by line, tell me if I'm reading it incorrectly.
I think given that we all agree that there are voters who think this will protect children makes it crazy to think that politicians must somehow know better.
I don't know what this means, there are voters who genuinely believe this, yes, i think i follow that bit.
I'm not sure what you think is crazy here (i'm not disagreeing, i just don't understand) , do you mean to say the politicians do or don't know better ?
It is well-accepted online that politicians are out-of-touch when it comes to technology, so it’s not like they understand the subject of this article.
This i agree with, i can also anecdotally add first hand experience of the consequences of such lack of understanding.
Not sure how it ties in to the other sentence though.
You mean sharing their real identity with online companies who will sell and/or lose it to hackers doesn't make children sAfE oNLinE??!!?!11?!
Hopefully this will happen sooner than later and change people’s minds about the whole thing.
Yeah, it won't be good, but it's going to happen eventually. Sooner is better.
It will make kids really good at bypassing the restrictions that get put in place, which will probably require them to go to some of the shadier places on the web, which could put them in more danger.
The people who made these rules don't understand the fundamental rule of the internet: any online restriction put in place, can be overcome with tools and knowledge that are also readily available on the Internet
“The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it” John Gilmore
Internet monitoring should fall to the parents. When the government parents, they parent everyone and abuse their power.
There are tons of products to prevent access to apps and websites. If all else pass a law so users opt-in to restricted internet access.
failure to comply could result in fines of up to 10% of global revenue or courts blocking services
So most federated platforms should be fine, as they don't have any revenue(usually) and blocking is hard because DNS is easy to bypass and there just are so many instances already.
This might actually make people move to Lemmy nice.
Makes identity theft much more likely though
Obviously emotive reason for an outright erosion of personal liberty and freedom, shocked Pikachu is shocked
Well, who'd have thought.
Has anyone got any half decent ideas for how to improve age verification? Obvs without this draconian shit.
I had a thought once about doing it with NFTs, where a company could independently verify you with certain metadata, like 'is human' or 'is over 18' etc. Then you get issued your token, and these sites can verify you without de-anoninising you.
Not sure if that's a naff idea, but would be interested to know if anyone's got anything better
The EU has something in the works with zero knowledge proofs. Which would be a good way to do this.
I still don't agree on the fact that this needs doing at all... But at least it's not as bad as the UK's half-baked nonsense
Unfortunately, even EU's solution doesn't support non-google-backed android.
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2025
94 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
75027 readers
355 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS