Why is there no privacy respecting solution for age verification? Like the government giving you some sort of token that says you’re over 18 and that’s it?
Because then you can share the token and everyone can use it
I’m sure a more robust solution is possible though.
Personal ids can also be used by non-owners, not much different than this theoretic age verification token. But yeah, ideally it would have a security layer to sufficiently confirm ownership.
Ah tbh I just realised that with the tokens being unique you could still limit accounts per token to 1, achieving the same effect as using real ID.
The scheme from the Danish government, shared in another comment, avoids the sharing by allowing token to be used only once, and, because the government issues the tokens, it can block people from getting tokens if they detect abuse. This can be done by rate-limiting, geoblocking and all sorts of techniques.
Remember that the function of the anonymous token is to not allow the service provider (like an OS, or a a website) to see your identity. This still allows the government to see which service provider you are using.
Hopefully the service provider can form pools yo block the government from knowing each individual website, but that’s not a given.
You can make them biometric and still be private, but that’s even more effort which they wont spend.
There is!, one of the officially recognised and approved ways is credit card verification, however afaik only steam is doing that.
I mean a dedicated, government issued age verification token that doesn’t reveal any data to the third party other than you are allowed access age wise.
i’ve seen screenshots of ios users being verified due to having their credit cards as payment methods tied to their name, which is a hell of a lot better than an ID
Because its not about age verification, its about tracking and controlling you and making a privacy respecting solution isn’t compatible with that.
So there should be a rebuttal demanding a privacy respecting age verification token, instead of just arguing against age verification, which technically does have a point. This way it’s disabled as excuse to sneak in the other things.
No, we still need to be against it. I said tracking and controlling, not just tracking.
They are already blocking resources that shouldn’t be blocked from youth, and even a privacy centric method would still let them do that, and then expand it to anything at a whim in the future.
We don’t want the internet built on this infrastructure, it would br a disaster.
Okay, it’s 2 topics then, the privacy, and basically adding a mandatory authorization layer to the internet derived from your real identity.
To some extent this already exists for movies or say to buy alcohol, getting a driving license etc. in the real world, where people often also have to verify their age. So here it could be asked on what exact basis the internet should work differently.
The basis is its how the world communicates and they become the gate keepers to communication and knowledge. Its like book banning on topics they don’t like but on a scale much more massive.
They’re already banning internet content from people that shouldn’t be about sexual health because its not about protecting kids its about controlling them and people.
You gotta be a good sheep and they’re going to do their best to make you one.
Not saying that these are not possibilities, but the technology itself and mistrust of government are, at least partly, different things. This is definitely a complex topic, spanning a lot of topics.
the technology itself and mistrust of government are, at least partly, different things
I don’t personally think so when it comes to technologies like this that can be used to surveil and/or control a population (edit: and especially that are being heavily driven by governments)
It’s pretty much a given that it will be used against us as history has shown us its always the case.
Trying to separate them out, gives them the extra support they need to pass it through and then abuse it.
Neither alcohol or the car verifies your age when you use it.
A minor can’t really sign up for an Internet subscription, so who gave them access?
Mandate age requirements when buying digital units would be better, but then we’re back to the “I have no control over my children and can’t set boundaries”
What if I told you that by regulation, the EU age verification system has to be anonymous and that it’s only the AUKUS countries that are moving forward in a way where anonymity is “a nice to have”.
Denmark’s system, which is a front-runner implementation in the EU, is going to be fully ZKP.
And yes it’s basically built with tokens.
You identify with a government system in an app. The services issues you signed tokens that are anonymous. You hand these anonymous tokens over to the sites that demand proof of age.
Anyone have a more in-depth technical description of how that works? I’m interested.
How are you supposed to abuse the data of people that you can’t even identify…?
That sounds great. I don’t follow the topic closely (probably I should), so wasn’t aware of these developments. This should be brought up in all discussions about age verification, so everyone knows there are better options.
Some people will feel that it’s not ideal, as you still have to trust the government, opposed to full anonymity, but that is a bit of a separate problem.
Ultimately someone has to vouch for “yes, this person is 18+”. People can’t self-attest, except through crappy biometric, so at some point a government ID has to be involved.
I’d trust my government over a credit reference agency that literally makes revenue from selling access to your private data.
Yes, and governments, at least democratic ones, represent the interests of their people, so at least on paper this is the correct way to structure things. Then you use the channels to government to ensure it’s regulated properly. If this is not possible or there’s no trust, there’s a larger problem.
Except in practice the Snowden leaks show us that democratic governments don’t always have our best interests at heart when it comes to this domain
There is.
It’s called Parental Controls.
It also does a fairly good job at preventing stuff from getting through.
One of the big issues right now is that there’s a lot of sexualized content on social media right now that’s bypassing parental controls because the social media services are doing a poor job of limiting that content when encountering a parental controlled device.
quite funny for me to read this on a furiphone…
ironic, even
For god’s sake can corporations and governments stop trying to
control and survey peopledo the job of parents and society. If parents are not doing their job then you need better awareness and education not to take over.Pretty sure everyone understand it’s not about the age.
Starmer really needs to fuck off.
What if a butterfly was made out of butter?
These kinds of thoughts could destroy big brother.
Mixed feelings about this.
However, ethical questions aside, and from a purely legal conformation standpoint, if the phone validates the user is over 18 and passes only that info as a token to whatever application or website requests it, then it’s a good implementation. It means elimination of multiple validation requirements, minimal transfer of data to third parties, fewer sources holding personal data, etc. Whether it works that way remains to be seen.
I haven’t read this particular law. But one proposed in Colorado still requires service providers to look for other indicators of age and override the one reported by the OS.
It’s always funny when Apple fanboys try to whitewash its brand.
“Apple is the most private mobile operating system there is that cares for its users that stands up to governments” until it doesn’t but that’s still great because it is how it is and apple has to obey laws and its fine because they hide their involvement with feds so well with marketing, and the cult accepts whatever they do, so they get a pass.
Have you tried not being a cult member to manufacture consent for corporations?
That or PR agencies are picking up fediverse to push people into being docile consumers.
Kinda just sounds like you were looking for an excuse to aggressively rant at someone. I don’t know how you came away thinking they were an apple fanboy after reading that comment full of ifs and general skepticism.
Not a single word in this rant has any relevance to my comment.
purely legal conformation standpoint
It’s still stupid even if it’s required by law.
The technical implementation, or the law itself?
Law itself
Guess that is an epic time for android phones. Sike! Unfortunately, majority will do ID verification.
Stay small. If you get too big, the government will start bossing you around.
Nah, I really think Android is becoming worse. In six months we won’t be able to install unoficial apps. It won’t be long until this happens too
What the fuck a 6 year old kid buys a $1000+ phone now? Man, these retards are not hiding it anymore
Most kids phones are hand me downs from parents these days. At least they were with my kids other than the first line purchase, and most of their friends. A 6 year old with an iPhone 11 wouldn’t be that weird.
No need for the r slur and parents’ handed down phones going to kids is not as sensational as you seem to think
The “slur” is for these technocratic corpos pushing the narrative down on OS level blatantly hiding “its for the kids” whilst gaining more control and power over users.
While “mental retardation” was originally introduced as a medical term in 1961 for people with intellectual disabilities, in the decades since, the R-word has become an insult used all too commonly in everyday language. Those who use the R-word often do so with little regard for the pain it causes people with intellectual disabilities—and the exclusion it perpetuates in our society.
Taken from specialolympics.org
So just call them assholes or fucktards - get creative
Fucktards implies “fucking retards”
Ouch… edited and thx.
Time for more users to adopt GrapheneOS
GrapheneOS is great and all but I refuse to willingly give google a single dollar for their hardware.
When GrapheneOS can be installed on any device is when I’ll gladly make that switch, and truthfully hope one day Apple iPhones can run other operating systems.
Buy a used one then. Google won’t see your money then.
Or wait a little longer. https://piunikaweb.com/2025/11/19/grapheneos-to-release-non-pixel-flagship-phone-in-q4-2026-or-in-2027/
In a revealing discussion with David Bombal, the GrapheneOS team confirmed they are actively working with a “top-tier Android OEM” to bring their hardened operating system to non-Google flagship devices.
Increasing the value of an used second hand market devices can empower other people to seek the Google Pixel devices as a decisive buy considering they keep their value for a longer time compared to other brands.
First time I’m hearing about a non google OEM made phone, that would be amazing!
If only you didn’t have to give google money to be able to install it.
Buy used and unlocked. Just sold one at my work, was a pixel 8 pro for 300 USD.
Except that’s not how that works - creating a healthy used resale market drives demand for the Pixel phones. I may not be giving them my money directly, but it’s still of huge monetary benefit to Google if I purchase one of their phones used. I like grapheneOS, I really do, but it’s inseparability from Google hardware is a serious problem.
No, it drives demand for used pixel phones. No one’s buying new pixels to supply the used market. They don’t interact in that way.
If you really want to make sure Google never benefits, buy one off Craigslist, put a case on it, and tell people its a Samsung galaxy with a custom home screen.
if a phone is tied to a svc acct like a telco provider- age verification should be automatic as THAT provider cannot open an acct for a child.
FUCKING THANK YOU!
I’m not in favour of any of the age restriction stuff UK government is doing.
Good argument, but:
Phones in the UK can be bought without a contract and untied to any network.
Pay as you go SIM cards can be bought without a contract.
Credit cards used to make purchases online require users to be 18 or over. Debit cards on the other hand can be issued to those under 18 (but a bank account will require evidence of ID, address, age). https://www.gohenry.com/uk/blog/financial-education/what-age-can-you-get-a-debit-card-in-the-uk
can a debit card be created by someone under 18? ie does a parent have to do it then give johnny a card? can a bodega owner sell a prepaid to a minor, and can prepaids be used?
just wondering where up the chain the responsibility lies. i’m all for corps being held to task, but also parents. if i handed my kid a phone it was my responsibility.
now he had phones that he acquired. i saw them. so i know it is largely irrelevant my thoughts on chain of concern.
in short: this is a terrible tar pit of gov horseshit sold in the “protect the kids” camp but really is “build a bigger fascist state db…”
A parent can do the age verification captcha for Johnny. All of this is bullshit once they start thinking any of this will stop kids who have the help of an adult (actually, already is imo). Anyone ever hear of kids getting adults to buy alcohol for them in the past?
Disgusting.
Looks like the ways they’re doing this is via credit card or account age. I wanted to keep my current phone until it died before switching to something else but fuck me, who knows what nonsense they’ll make us do in the near future.
What the actual fuck???
Wow, thats fucked. I hope Australia doesn’t decide to do this as well. This shit is happening so quickly at the moment
me too but i’m not overly optimistic. i don’t think there is a strong enough culture of anti-surveillance
I think they did this first, at least they passed the law first. Our “left center” government in action.
IT GETS TO A POINT
