Age verification proposals are often presented as a simple tradeoff: sacrifice a little privacy to better safeguard children online. But that framing overlooks a more fundamental question. What happens to people who cannot verify their age at all? This is particularly a problem when users are required to prove their age with identity documents.

      • StabbingSky@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        You do realize that a significant amount of laws that apply to the population don’t apply to politicians and the ultra wealthy, right?

        It’s currently one of the biggest societal issues on the planet.

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

          The point of this comment thread is not about who can get away with it. That’s not up for debate.

          The only point I have made is: the wealthy have no more power to hide their online activities than you or I do

          • StabbingSky@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yes, it is. The statement was that they would be beholden to the same age verification requirements that we would.

            What people have been trying to tell you is that your assumption isn’t backed by precedent.

            • lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              2 days ago

              You can argue whatever you like, but that’s not what was being discussed. Maybe start a new thread?

              • StabbingSky@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                That’s the fun part - they don’t! There are no special 1s nor 0s

                Yea, it was what was being discussed. Your assertion is that it’s impossible for the ruling class to have an exception. You seem to think a technical limitation exists where none does.

                You’re factually incorrect, and show neither an understanding of how networking/websites function, or understanding of how the ultra wealthy and the politicians they buy have a very long history of giving themselves loopholes so the rules don’t apply to them.

                Stop moving the goalposts

                • lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I never asserted anything over legality. Did you paste the wrong comment? You’re not making any sense. I asserted that wealth can’t buy you shielding today. What are you even on about?

                  • StabbingSky@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    Think for a minute about how providing your ID to access the internet would become a requirement.