• Strawberry@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    5 days ago

    Honestly I’m not opposed to age restriction, so long as its only ever accomplished using zero knowledge proofs of some kind. Or just without revealing identity. But they’ve made it pretty clear with the systems they have implemented already nearly everyone is either incompetent or the goal is survelence all along.

    The bill is the “Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill” here and this is the amendment they’re talking about: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3909/stages/20215/amendments/10027478

    There’s also a petition to stop that bit “Do not ban children from using virtual private networks”. I’m pesamistic about its chance of it succeeding but after the shinanigins around digital ID, who knows?

    Slightly unrelated but the other day I discovered tor browser was being blocked on NHS wifi I could only connect with a bridge. The internet in this country makes me depressed now.

    • Noja@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      5 days ago

      Parents can already control which websites their kids visit by using parental control software, basically every porn website which complies with these identity verification laws uses it. https://rtalabel.net/page.php?content=parents Restricting these safe websites makes users switch to other, freely accessible, and often less moderated sites.

      • Strawberry@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Exactly, even increasing education on parental controls or legal requirements for that would be better if they actually cared about the children. I think the goal is actually just surveilence.

        Slightly more conspiratorially, I think the goal might be to do just that: push users to more unsafe options, then use that to justify more crackdowns.

      • fizzle@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        Yeah but imagine trying to explain to your 15yo kid that you’re not going to let them interact with their friends on facebook or whatever because reasons.

        • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 days ago

          Mine aren’t on Facebook. They can use iMessage and Signal. It’s not the end of the world. They read books and talk to their friends in meatspace.

    • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      5 days ago

      The people creating a moral panic about protecting the children only took action against a paedophile when information came to light that he may have leaked secret government information to his paedophile buddy.

      Not the child sex crimes.

      When they do something about the child sex traffickers in power, then they we talk about protecting the children on the internet.

    • Virtvirt588@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Honestly I’m not opposed to age restriction, so long as its only ever accomplished using zero knowledge proofs of some kind. Or just without revealing identity.

      Restriction of a class is the restriction of all. Laws like this shouldn’t be marked by shallow legal lines, this is yet again a play on discrimination.

        • badgermurphy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          That’s not what he’s saying at all!

          Its widely agreed that many activities are not safe or healthy for kids, or probably anyone. The current people in power have convinced us that bad behavior should be enforced completely backwards, making the victim the criminal:

          • It’s not the poor casino operator’s fault that a devious adolescent animal tricked them into letting them gamble, it was that damn tricky kid’s fault!
          • Its not the upstanding businessman running the meat packing plant’s fault all these durn illegals keep fooling him into hiring them for $4/hour, its their fault for taking the job!
          • Its not the fault of the fine young man just following his natural urges that a girl got stalked and raped, it was her slutty clothes and lewd behavior that got her what she really wanted!

          See what I mean? Many of our laws, including those to “save the kids” are always looking for ways to pin the wrong on the person being exploited, not the one doing the exploiting.

    • frostysauce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      The problem with age restriction laws, even if implemented in a way that protects privacy, is that I don’t trust the state to decide what is adult content.

    • MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      No idea why you are getting down voted. Zero knowledge verification for age would be great. You could also do zero knowledge verification for being a real person to distinguish people from bots.

      • [deleted]@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        Because the underlying concept is so terrible and guaranteed to have bad results as it is inherently ‘think of the children’ bullshit. The entire premise is flawed.

        • badgermurphy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          Are you saying that the underlying concept of zero knowledge ID verification is terrible? If so, how do you mean?

          There are multiple published ways to do so cryptographically, some of which have been mathematically proven to work, so conceptually the idea is sound. There are also other potential uses for it beyond just making sure kids don’t watch porn, so even if you disagree with that type of censorship, as many here do, the concept of it is not terrible itself.

          Is there maybe something else I didn’t think of that you feel makes it terrible?

          • [deleted]@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            No, I am saying the underlying concept that people should be expected or required to prove their age or who they are on the internet for access is bullshit. How that is proven doesn’t matter, because it will always escalate and any credentials can just be used by someone else anyway.

            For example, how would any kind of proof work on a computer without a camera or other means of identifying who is using it at a point in time? I have zero plans to ever add a camera to my desktop PC. If I have to go through hoops like I did to get a stupid IRS account that ended up with a fucking video call on my phone to prove it was me creating the account anywhere else I won’t bother. If they want me to use that ID to do things, then anything I can do is easily tracked.

            Self identification for all internet activity is the wet dream of tech bros, and fascists, and other authoritarians. I would much rather kids stumble across porn because they clicked ‘yes I am an adult’ than give more power to the pedos running the system.