1033
Age checks could turn internet into an ID checkpoint and would kill anonymity, Proton CEO says (proton.me)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
225 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Online threats to children are real, but the headlong pursuit of age verification that we’re seeing around the world is unacceptable in its approach and far too broad in scope — and we simply can’t afford to get this wrong.

To be clear, parents’ concerns are valid and sincere. Few people would argue that kids should have unfettered access to adult material, to self-harm how-tos, to social media platforms that manipulate them and expose them to abuse.

But it’s the very depth of those worries that is being cynically exploited. Age verification as is currently being proposed in country after country would mean the death of anonymity online.

And we know exactly who stands to gain: The same tech giants who built the privacy nightmare that the internet is today.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 6 months ago (3 children)

People are understandably heated over this subject. That often results in heated reactions. It doesn't invalidate their points, however, and to claim that it instead proves your point that surveillance is necessary could evidence a bias on your part when it comes to engaging with this very divisive topic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

    I didn't claim it invalidates their points. I'm saying that the same points can be made in a civilized way and the very toxicity of online discussions is direct result of online anonymity. And yes, I understand why assholes and children react emotionally when we suggest that they should reveal their identity. That doesn't mean their behavior is justified.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I actually think it can be commendable to speak out in a situation you view as hostile. I also don't condone the personal attacks some people might throw at those who voice opinions they don't agree with.

    I would also have to say that I would assume that you get that it's not guaranteed people are going to be entirely civil when you essentially tell them that you think that the rights they believe in should be done away with.

    the very toxicity of online discussions is direct result of online anonymity

    And you kind of just did exactly what you said you didn't, using these interactions as a validation of your claims against those of the people you disagree with.

    Having said that, it's often better to take the high road when we can. It's possible that not everyone who disagrees with you (or me) is an asshole.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    And you kind of just did exactly what you said you didn’t, using these interactions as a validation of your claims against those of the people you disagree with.

    You mean I claimed it invalidates their points? I really don't see how. Again, the points about usefulness of anonymity (which few people actually made) are not invalidated by the toxicity. People say "we need anonymity because X" (I don't think any real argument was made here so I don't even know what X is) and I say "the toxicity and misinformation outweigh the benefits of X". The arguments for X are still valid and if someone can give examples of X that outweigh the negative results of anonymity I will change my mind. So far all I've seen is "it's a slippery slope" and "you're a fascist".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent