• Babalugats@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    I think it’s important to point out that is yet again the EPP, this one being led by Henna Virkunnen.

    As was the undemocratic vote that was pushed through by Roberta Metsola

    The most effective way for all of us to stop these relentless attacks on the internet and our privacy, is to stop them getting elected in the first place.

    EPP representation in each country.

    Use the internet for something useful -

    #STOP THE EPP

  • moonburster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I’m fed up with this shit. My parents educated me on the internet and the potential of seeing things you don’t want to see. They knew there was no change to 100% block or monitor what we did and instead made sure that they were always there if we did see something disturbing.

    Now I’m at the frontier age of getting kids and I just know that my kids will be just as smart in circumventing this kind of bs as I was (school monitoring web traffic ain’t working with a vpn) and I will gladly teach them about the internet. Hell, I’ll even take them back to when the internet of old and show what kind of crap we had to deal with.

    Solutions like these are like a bandaid. You’re not solving the problems. And even that is a utopian thought, but they ought to focus on the people that make the web unsafe, not the kids

  • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    The way it’s imposed on the fediverse is bad, but I like this part:

    The Blueprint is open source and uses zero-knowledge proofs: cryptographic methods that prove a statement like “over 15” without revealing the underlying data. Each member state must provide at least one such solution free of charge to its citizens.

    • tomatosametomato@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      How often can I probe it? If I can establish you are over 15 but under 17… I know you are 16 (squeeze theorem or something)

      • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        It’s not clear but it seems like the service is restricted to the same age ranges it asks anyone, so it couldn’t do that as effectively. Although it could just use when the user passes from one category from another to get their age, at least if the account was created when the user was >18, but that seems unavoidable.

  • zangwill@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    1 day ago

    I hate when people validate the core idea of needing to protect children through age verification. Timmy lying about being over 18 to look at some boobs is not a problem that needs to be resolved. It’s like requiring everyone to wear body cameras specifically to prevent store clerks from being rude to you.

    • HerbGrower@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      You say that about Timmy, but what about Sally who is drawing very detailed furry porn? Or Jack with his questionable anime notepad.

      Just some real examples I remember from school. You can’t even outlaw the pen to stop it, the rock layers around us were chalk. Quite often saw kids use it to draw on paths.

    • bjc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      1 day ago

      tbh, i’m more scared of the pedos that haunt roblox and every other platform for children rather them seeing boobs.

      i don’t like age verification either, but that means my kids aren’t allowed to use the internet except in a very restricted fashion. meanwhile every single one of their peers is left to run wild, so they’re socially isolated as a result

      don’t pretend internet anonymity is an unalloyed good. fuck, just look at the bot farms for a less rapey problem of enormous magnitude.

      • Broadfern@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Roblox needs to be burned down for the situations they knowingly put kids into to be honest

        FFS I’m showing my age here but Webkinz had a strict locked down, easily revocable parental opt-in requirement for anything resembling typed chat, and the default was a drop-down menu of innocuous stuff that meant nobody could exchange information to go onto other platforms. Roblox could do something like that but shoving data vulnerability onto parents and kids is a sleazy cop out.

        Platforms that advertise openness to kids should be held to stricter standards, for sure.

      • aceshigh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        16 hours ago

        … welcome to parenthood, where you have to watch what your kids do… you’re the parent… I don’t even have the words…

      • LucidNightmare@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        19 hours ago

        As a parent, you should be the one making sure to educate your child about the internet. If necessary, learn how to block websites on your router.

        The governments job isn’t to require an ID to access the entire internet for something that a parent should be doing.

        • bjc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          19 hours ago

          i’m already keeping them off the wider internet. that’s not the point. the point is that even if i do that, society as a whole makes it very, very difficult.

          i’m not saying anyone should give a website id. one of the major things i repeat is: “never give a website a face or an id”

          but the idea that it’s just reactionary “omg my kids can’t see boobs” is flat out wrong. the internet is a dangerous place for everyone, but especially children. pretending it’s not is hiding your head in the sand. at the same time as it is incredibly dangerous, basically all the forces of modern society are trying to force our children on to it.

          this is a battle i fight daily, and have been fighting for many years, and i’m tired of people trying to pretend it’s simple when it is anything but.

          you are not going to win over people rightly concerned about their kids by telling them it’s actually simple when it isn’t. you’re going to drive them away.

          you want to tackle this, you have to acknowledge reality, and that reality is that on the internet, your children are prey.

          • LucidNightmare@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            That is what you signed up for when having a child. The way society in general is not doing the right thing doesn’t matter.

            There are better ways to mitigate the dangers of the internet other than the literal worst option, blanket ID for internet access. Which is what we really know is coming, which is why they are fighting so hard to pass it every other week it seems.

            Look at what they do for kids already and ask yourself if you truly find them to be doing this in the best interests of the parents or the kids?

            This will lead to darker roads for everyone. It’s not my fault, or your fault, that people don’t know how to raise children in the modern era.

            How about the government bring back computer classes and make material on what you are saying? That would be the simpler approach, right? Educate everyone on HOW to navigate the web?

            But no. Let’s always go with the worst option, because it’s really NOT about the kids.

            • bjc
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              19 hours ago

              you need to re-read everything i wrote because you clearly did not understand it when i twice said that i don’t want id verification. you’re not arguing with me, you’re arguing with someone else in your head

              • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                13 hours ago

                you are not going to win over people rightly concerned about their kids by telling them it’s actually simple when it isn’t. you’re going to drive them away.

                This is you saying you want this.

                There’s one thing I agree with, it’s not about protecting kids from boobs. It’s about completely eliminating anonymity from the Internet, while acquiring a massive database of personal information, easily tied to websites you visit, and easily leakable by hackers.

                • bjc
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 hours ago

                  This is you saying you want this.

                  yes. does that say “we need age verification”? it says we need to acknowledge legitimate issues if we’re to have any hope at consensus.

                  age verification is not the answer, it’s just the only one being proffered… you want to make this go away? find a better answer to the problem and espouse that.

                  here’s a small one: no use of internet connected laptops for school work since that is widespread and directly undermines a parent’s ability to keep tabs on their kids.

                  the answer is not “you’re just a prude afraid of boobs, loser.” that’s how you drive people to the right wing, because at least those guys are saying “the internet is dangerous for kids.” and that’s how you end up in the funnel.

                  eta: sorry about the insult if you saw it. it had no place here

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    110
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Man this is fucking exhausting. The treadmill of these policies.

    EU lemmings, who or what groups are promoting these? It feels like every time one gets defeated another crops up and that it’s relentless. Is this an astroturfed or organic campaign?

      • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Imagine failing so hard to create a metaverse, blowing literal billions of dollars and a large chunk of their entire net worth, and still having a ton of money leftover to push this shitty idea for almost a year at a global scale.

      • lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        It’s tech giants in general trying to monopolize the Internet through regulatory capture. They’re the only ones who can afford to implement the age verification methods demanded. Laws like this effectively turn the Internet into cable TV.

    • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      65
      ·
      1 day ago

      I would be very surprised to learn there is an organic demand for this shit. Sure there are some lazy parents who might want this without understanding the wider ramifications, but for the most part it is mix of authoritarian politicians and corporate lobbyism doing the work.

      Any legitimate political demand would not be made again, and again, and again, and again… Even after it gets voted down repeatedly. There are undemocratic forces at work for sure.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 day ago

        Sure but there have to be organizations behind these policies. Someone is proposing this stuff again and again. This is mirrored by corporate lobbying in the US, where grassroots movements can resist it, but corporate lobbying almost always wins out in the end, because its sustained by industry. So we can resist a policy a few times, but if the same bad ideas keep re-emerging, eventually one gets through.

        • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 day ago

          Oh i agree, it is utterly farcical that they can even do this against the will of the people. A rejected proposal should not be able to be submitted again after some minor cosmetic changes.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      There’s broad support for stopping predatory behavior by corporations that are targetting kids (and adults, but mostly kids). This is mostly the same stuff people have been complaining about for a decade or so at this point. Loot boxes, gacha mechanics, ad infested (and therefore stuffed with spyware for “marketing”), complicated multilayered digital currencies, battle passes, daily login rewards, etc. Basically all the well known dark patterns.

      However rather than addressing the bad behavior directly, politicians either through malice or incompetence (likely at the behest of corporate lobbyists) keep putting forth these ID laws that just make things worse instead of actually solving the problem people have been complaining about.

      • hneerqe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 day ago

        These politicians know full well what they’re doing. At least they should and there’s no excuse. But they know.

        • orclev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’d assume many do, although some are likely just entirely out of their depth and are just listening to what the lobbyists are telling them.

  • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    It is unclear which servers are covered. The draft adopts the definition of a social network from the Digital Markets Act. Its Recital 11 clarifies that it concerns “information society services,” which EU law defines as services generally provided for remuneration. Whether a private, non-commercial hobby server falls under this depends on the legal classification of the specific offering. The statement that every instance without exception is covered is therefore an overstatement.

    Funny when the article itself contradicts the breathless clickbait headline.

    That said, perhaps this will apply and cause problems. Or perhaps not.

  • sznowicki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    If it applies to mastodon it also applies to IMAP right? I wonder his exactly they see email protocol being updated to check how old is the recipient and i bet all those spammers will NOT send their unwanted content to my child inbox.

  • minorkeys@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I feel all of this is to prepare for future legal enforcement of approved internet use. AI is destroying the internet we know and value because rich people want more power, as they do with everything they touch.

      • minorkeys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Which is the end of the internet and a dissolution back into multiple closed networks, cutting us off from each other.