cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/43948771

Reddit hires company to verify user age with selfie or photo of government ID.

all 35 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 30 points 1 year ago (4 children)

But bots have no age, haven’t they?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    "Persona promises not to retain the photo for longer than 7 days and will not have access to your Reddit data such as the subreddits you visit,"

    Why would they need to have it any longer than the few seconds it takes to verify the age?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Look at what Reddit is saying. It's absurd:

    For UK users under 18, Reddit said it has to restrict sexually explicit content; content that promotes suicide, deliberate self-injury, and eating disorders; content that incites abuse or hatred against people based upon protected characteristics; bullying content; content that promotes violence or "depicts real or realistic serious violence against a person, an animal, or a fictional creature"; content that promotes challenges or stunts that are likely to cause serious injuries; content that encourages people to use harmful substances or substances in harmful quantities; content that shames people based on body type or physical features; and "content that promotes or romanticizes depression, hopelessness and despair."

    WTF? How is this supposed to work? A system that auto-blocks all NSFW tagged content itself as a blunt instrument is viable - but half the stuff on here, on Reddit here isn't even necessarily tagged as NSFW when its posted. Are extreme mountain biking or skiing or skateboarding or other similar types videos going to be age-gated because they could be content that "promotes challenges or stunts that are likely to cause serious injuries"? How do you verify whether or not content specifically romanticises "hopelessness" or "despair" exactly? Are Giles Corey songs now 18+? What does that even mean? Even the writing of it is Orwellian.

    It also adds "depicts real or realistic serious violence against a person, an animal, or a fictional creature" ?????

    Are action movie clips now going to be age-gated? Or video game clips? From TV shows and films that are PG-13?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    They’ll get round to Lemmy eventually.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    That’s the beauty of federation. Host your own instance. You can prove your age by looking in a mirror.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    And any instances hosted in the UK or accessible from the UK are subject to this law.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yes but all that means is you have to have content restrictions for under 18 users of your instance. Set your instance as private and only logged in users see anything. Done

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Verification is part of the law

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 14 points 1 year ago (9 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It'll only be an issue if they host mature content or federate with other instances that do, no?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Why would they have to handle it? This is Rddit's choice, not the law. I mean, why would Redit decide it now? Does Feddit fall under the same act? Or is it something new?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Feddit is actually (presumably) hosted in the UK, so if Ofcom actually knew what the Fediverse is they could start trying to demand they do age verification.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    We're hosted in Germany, but that doesn't actually matter as the admins are physically in the UK so Ofcom fines are actually a worry. I need to do another review (yay), but I'm pretty sure we don't have to do any age verification. We do have to assume all our users are children though, as we can only say we don't if we do 'highly effective age verification'* of our users, and we do host content that is 'likely to appeal to children', but I don't believe we host anything that would need to be gatekept from children. We actively block NSFW content and as far as I'm aware there isn't a suicide encouragement or terrorist recruitment community on Lemmy. There are maybe some things that I may need to be changed/patch in Lemmy (e.g. letting users lock their own posts), or making some safety tools (one I want to work on is doing perceptual hashing of images embedded in markdown as current tools only work on post links), but I don't think complying is necessary an issue for us. I'm not a lawyer though and that's just my understanding, we could be fucked.

    * This entire 'force every website to keep a separate database of users adult status' is so stupid and I swear it only works like this because of lobbying from companies like Yoti. PornHub is right that it should be device based, but these laws are only using children as a crutch. It's implemented like this because certain parts of the British establishment find porn icky and are hoping by making it more invasive to access that you'll stop watching it. Of course, all this is going to do is push people to sites that don't follow the law so host more extreme content.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Nah lol. Old reddit UI and a VPN should work fine, for now at least.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I was told once that if you use a VPN Reddit Will Shadow ban you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    There's already a big flaw in this, and it won't work with teenagers.

    If they want to access Reddit, they'll just do something like grab a pic of their grandparent who never uses Reddit, sneak out their ID whilst they're sleeping, and get verification without anyone getting notified.
    Sounds extreme but I can just imagine teens doing this without issue. It would be extremely easy.

  • source
  • 27 comments in c/privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post
    [–] 39 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    Gotta put a lot of trust in some third party company not to reveal all the kinky stuff you watch that's tied to your identity.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (15 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (14 children)
  • [+] -4 points 1 year ago (13 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    That's quite a claim! Can you give concrete examples?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    That’s quite a claim! Can you give concrete examples?

    First give an example of online use case that you'd think is safe and private, and I'll list ways that it probably isn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    I don't know what that is, nor have I used it, but I'm assuming it requires an internet connection, operating system, and browser at the very least. If so, there are multiple ways in which your ISP, browser (and any plug-ins you use in the browser), as well as the method of connecting to the internet (i.e. DNS server, wifi/router, mobile data connection, etc.) that could be used to collect data or metadata to build a profile. The device you are using, or even the screen-size could be useful to an attacker (or marketer).

    That doesn't mean that the contents of whatever is being transferred to/from "bitmessage" can be read, but "someone" would know that you're using Bitmessage at the very least, the times you use it, perhaps the location you use it from, the device, OS, what plug-ins you might use. DNS records could build an even clearer picture of your activities. If Bitmessage requires an account or other form of verifying who you are (or how someone can contact you), then those could be collected and used against you.

    That's not to say you can't protect yourself from some of the snooping. But apparently, the more you do, the more unique your online fingerprint is, which ironically, makes you more vulnerable.

    Because the internet isn't truly P2P (there's always a third-party in the mix, either to deliver the data service or to relay data), you have to assume there are third-parties who can (and probably do) collect data from your activities.

    But... your threat model also influences whether these "risks" are even worth worrying about. If you're a regular teen on Reddit, you probably don't give a shit at all. But if you're a public figure, perhaps one who would be a target for governments or bad actors, then every link in the chain of interactions you have with the internet could expose you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    It doesn't use a browser, nor DNS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitmessage.

    It broadcasts all messages, but only the intended recipient can read the message with their private key. So in terms of metadata, they can't even see who is contacting who. All the third parties know, afaik, is that you use it. They don't even know when and to or from whom messages are send.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Your comment is an example. Without certain measures in place, your comment is now potentially in the hands of:
    Your instance
    Your app/browser
    Your local network
    Your ISP
    Your OS
    Your Government
    These are just examples, but you have to trust that each of these privacy policies or your equivalent of them is telling the truth, or have measures in place to mitigate said data collection

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    I find it unlikely my ISP is breaking my quantum encrypted VPN just for ads

    They don't need to break encryption. You have an account to post here, and I'm assuming you are using the same device to access other services you have which also use accounts, right? Now, suppose your IP address doesn't rotate very often, it would be very easy for a company like Google to relate at least a few accounts to start building a profile.

    Then, since posting here is pretty easy to scrape, even more data can be collected... like the fact that you use a linux router and OS. The profile keeps getting bigger with every new interaction, and at some point, it won't even matter if your IP changes, because there may be enough static data somewhere that could be linked to a different account (i.e. your phone, phone's OS, screen size, etc. can be used to isolate you from other users).

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    The original comment stated that everything I do online is (1) both tied to my real identity and (2) that these intermediaries can interpret and share/sell the content.

    Can you give an example that's not an intentionally public comment, on a public platform?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Governments all around europe are so scared of people communicating.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    You basically have to go there to view the NSFW content, don't you? I looked around some server federation rules and it seems like most servers block that one's local communities. (It doesn't appear to be out of ill will for the server, as most of them still allow federation of non-NSFW communities... But I imagine it's a large chunk of data to federate with very little reward since most Lemmy servers are run on little more than donations, volunteer efforts, and fumes.)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    A few years ago YT suddenly started to enforce their system of not allowing me to watch videos tagged as 18+, my account was 17 years or so old, but I had never verified it, then it ticked over to 18 years old a few months later, and everything works now...

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    I can't watch a lot of youtube videos because of that, as that made them require an account.

    This legislation will make sure everything gets locked behind an identifying login, lest a bad word might appear, and they get fined.

    Good for the platforms and government ofcourse. It's only us people that lose.

    Move along now. The joined corporate government newspeak will save you from evil. Feel like something's wrong? Here are your ssri's, osempic, and an AI best friend to keep you company 😚

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Bruh, I've been 18+ since I was 14! 😁

    Also, this is just another way to collect personal data that you'd never willingly give up through normal interaction with their platform.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I have always been 18+ myself

  • source
  • 12 comments in c/technology@lemmy.zip view that post
    [+] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    If a website requires me to verify my age, I'll stop using that website. If an app requires it, I'll either stop using that app, or use a VPN, but there's no way in hell I'm doing the verification process.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I think this might be a massive gift to people who want the internet to remain free and unrestricted.

    The more people you drive into the underground, the less well you'll be able to regulate. Usually, it's a cautionary tale about carelessly over-strict regulation. But, I guess it can also be an uplifting tale about carelessly over-strict regulation, depending on what you're trying to regulate. Lord knows, we need to be teaching people how to dodge around local internet restrictions and monitoring right now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Unfortunately most people don't think like you and I. Reddit wants the masses to feed AI, and they'll get them. They don't care about the "fringe" elements. They want consensus. Hence, all the bans.

    FFS, if we think reddit is bad, what about the billions still on FaceBook? I literally flinch if I land there on accident. FUCK! GAH! It's repulsive to me, yet here we are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    If you make it to sterile it gets boring, if all the interesting stuff is elsewhere and all you have is meme slop you have no competitive advantage

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    There are numerous tools already out there for parents to use to monitor and censor what their kids see online. Schools have been using it since the Internet came out and it's only gotten more robust over the years. Not only that, but kids always figure out a way around this shit and will continue to do so until the end of time because that's just what they do. The only thing this does is punish everyone and implement more surveillance. And since people are people and kids are kids, there will be workarounds within days even without a VPN.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'd prove I'm over 18 by purchasing a VPN subscription.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*

    I was gonna say all this is going to do is make a load of people start using VPNs, who would have otherwise had no reason to. Therefore making the surveillance they want to do even harder

  • source
  • parent