Please upload your photo ID as response to this post.
post
I'm all pro Age Verification, the good old "If you are over 18 click yes"
If I setup my own private instance and don't make myself verify my age.. can they still stop me from following others or other instances following me in some way?
It would only ever be instances specific would it not?
I am failing to see how the highlighted text is saying that they will implement it. My understanding is that they are evaluating yhe situation. Am I wrong?
I mean... They have to.
Countries are making it law, so sooner or later, fedi projects are going to have to deal with that crap.
Do they? There's one thing to make it law, another thing to enforce it. OSA in the UK has been around since last July and managed to do nothing other than pick a fight with 4chan and get nowhere. I seem to recall someone mentioned Lemmy to Ofcom in a discussion regarding OSA and they were literally like "What's a Lemmy?"
How on earth do you imagine a regulator is going to work out how to deal with 50+ federated instances (for instance)?
I mean if they can really just do nothing, then that is also something it would be good to be sure about.
Nintendo has shown that it is possible to attack open source projects at the repository level, and while that wouldn't necessarily stop development, it would be a step down to force development technically "underground".
And if instances have to start being regularly replaced, that WILL cause attrition.
I just think this is a logistical dead-end for regulators who may rely on the chilling effect of the thought of being targeted rather than actually being targeted. Unless the Fediverse somehow becomes massive, I don't see that it'll ever enter their eyes. Especially as many places will be based in the USA who is the least likely country to implement these laws, and the most hostile to any threats from foreign regulators (see again the 4chan example).
Especially as many places will be based in the USA who is the least likely country to implement these laws
uh, what?
Yes? USA is the least likely to do this. Porn laws in various states don't apply to social media.
Other attempts have been stuck in legislative hell, been unenforced or have court cases challenging their legality (Mississipi)
US Tech firms profit the most from it, the verification data lands on some palantir server - as the recent discord fiasco implied.
Not even two weeks later, California is making OS level age verification a thing.
I'm not even sure how that is remotely enforceable, although this also is a somewhat different thing to what this thread is about.
You may want to look into what the legal requirements actually are, and how it changes who is liable. It is outright draconian.
Essentially, it requires the OS to find out the age of the user, and then inform ALL software that is run by API. Any software that theoretically could use the data, and still allows a child to see something they should not have, will be liable.
You claimed that the US was the least likely to do this sort of thing...
Instead, despite the incompetence, they are clearly spearheading this globally along with the UK. Making it most decidedly the first place that will have to deal with this crap.
Not the last.
Yes, but if the OS was not designed in California and you are not based in California (you're not Windows, basically) - I fail to see how they can meaningfully compel anyone to follow this. Moreover, even if an OS somehow could know the users age - that doesn't automatically mean all other software that exists automatically reads it and responds to it as necessary.
Does the law compel anyone making software to recognise this?
Windows, and any other OS will be illegal in California unless it implements this.
Apple, for one, is headquartered in California.
So, the OS wont work until the user verifies their age somehow.
Moreover, even if an OS somehow could know the users age - that doesn't automatically mean all other software that exists automatically reads it and responds to it as necessary. Does the law compel anyone making software to recognise this?
Did you not read my comment? Anyone writing software for an OS that implements this, can be sued (in California) if their application ignores the API signals from the OS and allows access to age-restricted content.
Or is your argument really "this won't affect linux, so it doesn't matter" ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names "persons" as potentially liable.
The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.
Windows, and any other OS will be illegal in California unless it implements this.
Right, as I said - I just don't see how this is meaningfully enforceable. It's a complete farce. It's on the level of the Online Safety Act it being enforceable.
Apple, for one, is headquartered in California.
Oh, I forgot Apple. Sure.
But there are many other OS. How on earth can they credibly enforce this?
Did you not read my comment? Anyone writing software for an OS that implements this, can be sued (in California) if it ignores the API signals from the OS and allows access to age-restricted content.
Yeah, this is just not meaningfully enforceable. Big companies will follow, but it would mostly be ignored by everyone else.
Is your argument really "this won't affect linux, so it doesn't matter" ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names "persons" as potentially liable.
The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.
And they are already working on an even more overreaching version that will close loopholes in the current legalese.
Is your argument really “this won’t affect linux, so it doesn’t matter” ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names “persons” as potentially liable.
I'm taking the position that this is largely unenforceable at a software and OS level beyond larger players that come from California or specifically do a lot of trade in California.
The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.
This specifically is quite different to most other efforts. Not sure if it might get constitutionally tested.
...
So this is not a concern to you?
The fact that there are people in leadership positions that want this, and have reasons why they want this, is below note. And not worth opposing?
This will lead to infrastructure, that should not exist, existing.
That it can be avoided is not a solution. It should not be built in the first place.
It is a concern, I just don't know how it's meaningfully enforceable at scale. Just like OSA. What do you want me to do about it personally?
I never supported the idea.
I'd like you to realize that "the USA who is the least likely country to implement these laws" is literally the opposite of current reality.
They are making some of the greatest efforts to make legally mandated user and age tracking a thing, as well as legally mandated user identity based content-gating.
I’d like you to realize that “the USA who is the least likely country to implement these laws” is literally the opposite of current reality.
In comparison to Europe/UK/AUS which is far further along this road (and implemented social media age requirements), absolutely. Also, apparently it's just a checkbox as far as this particular California law goes.
Still waiting for wikipedia to block itself in UK.
It doesn't say what they're planning to do about laws requiring age verification. It says they're forming a group to figure that out. The problem with bad legislation is you can't just ignore it, so they need to at least work out an approach. In itself this news is neutral, but we'll have to see what they decide.
So, they are basically announcing that they are
forming a committee
to figure out
how to talk about
how to understand the stuff?
...Honestly, it could have been a lot worse.
When you get big enough, you are under more scrutiny and these laws are spreading more and more. I can imagine the Mastodon team is under lots of external pressure to start following these new laws. Mastodon won't be the last to start thinking about implementation.
I hope it's face verification so I can just point the camera at a guy on Google images or whatever to get it to let me in.
Could it be best way to provide legal liability for how to comply with vague and easy to misinterpret badly-written law is to have a process underway at your organization to examine it? Just move slowly till the bigger guys lawyers figure it out?
Everyone on today’s internet is directly exposed to regulations like GDPR, the Digital Services Act (DSA), the Digital Markets Act (DMA), and lately numerous age verification (or assurance) laws and related social media bans for minors.
How, how, how did we manage to stray this far from John Perry Barlow's dreams? Is there any good left in the world? ;_;
I think going out an meeting people IRL is what I will go for next.
This is a real leopards ate MY face?!? moment for much of the fediverse.
Yeah turns out there are consequences to rightously bandwagoning on moral panics....
I would be totally down for some trustworthy and transparent verification service that does not store or hand out your data. Since pretty much everyone will need to verify for whatever at some point, I think this would be awesome to have
I don't think that means they're planning on doing age verification. Mastodon and anyone running a Mastodon instance has to operate within whatever legal regime their country imposes. I interpet the above as putting some work towards figuring out ways to do that. If a country mandates age verification and Mastodon has no ability whatsoever to comply, then Mastodon becomes illegal in that country. Maybe we don't care about that for a few countries here and there. If that happens in the EU however, that'd be a problem and a likely blow to the Fediverse.
The thing is that age verification in a digital world is not easy.. what exactly does the government mandate as a valid verification method?
Like.. would asking the user their age be valid enough? ... because it's not like a reliable method exist (not even credit card verification prevents a minor from taking their parents card and go through it). IMHO, until the government doesn't actually set a standard, I don't see why websites should actually give anything else than the most minimal effort possible when it comes to this.
Agreed. I imagine this working group would be working in the direcrion of the minimal viable options, including figuring out whether they need to do anything at all.
The thing is, if the country wants age verification, the country has to give a way to verify the age of their citizens. A website by the government that returns an encrypted cookie verifying the user as adult would be the solution. The work is on the government as they are enforcing a rule.
Another way for the government is to verify a company to do this work, with the security this entails.
I don't think politicians ever consult someone for these changes. They just want to de-anonymize the internet.
Maybe I'm not following, but the fear is that government requirements amount to an ID requirement, which makes anonymous posting impossible. That's why I care about IDs, at least.
Yes. But my point is that until now that has not been made explicit, so there's no reason for websites to require IDs right now, at least not until the government does mandate such a system. So I was wondering what's the minimal effort that would satisfy current mandate.
1 comment