Comment on Trial finds age assurance can be done, as social media ban deadline looms
Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 day agoThe problem at the moment is that the technology does not aid parents in this.
Personally, I would like to see the existence of this sort of age-gating API be mandatory, and set some government guidelines, but leave it up to parents whether or not they wish to use it. Because right now, unless they are hovering over the shoulder of their children every moment they’re on a computer, there’s literally nothing they can do with available technology to prevent children accessing age-inappropriate material. So a law that can help them out without forcing their hand would be great.
TimePencil@infosec.exchange 1 day ago
@Zagorath
That's right! (That's what we/you were talking about, wasn't it?)
Compel the major devices and OSes to have the feature you suggested.
Make it a requirement for all devices, and available to all users. Give parents the *option* to 'lock down' or 'age restrict' a device.
The government should otherwise steer away from their likely dystopian solution.
SuperMoosie@mastodon.au 1 day ago
@TimePencil @Zagorath
The esafety report shows parents prefer to talk to their kids and set boundaries rather than set up technology solutions such as parents
controls. They are not using the ones already available.
Their age verification solutions being flogged to the government are not accurate. Particularly when everyone will need to use it, not just the underage.
Why would you want to restrict information about Emergencies, health services, support, government information, sporting clubs, mental health, volunteer groups from kids? The will effect their creativity, connections with families and friends around the globe. Why would you take online friends and connections away from those being physically bullied at school?
The whole thing is stupid.
SuperMoosie@mastodon.au 1 day ago
@TimePencil @Zagorath
Also the testing they subjected the age verification system was in ideal conditions. Perfect lighting, no one trying to trick or grt around it. Yet it still flagged kids under 16 as 35 years old. Put it in the real world with less than perfect lighting, photos not focused etc and it will let a heap of people in that shouldn't and lock lots of people out that should be let in.
This from the Australian government that has a history of stuffing up IT, such as the census debacle.
Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 day ago
I don’t think you’ll find anyone in the fediverse willing to defend face-based age-verification systems. It’s a complete farce to pretend it’s ever going to be viable, even if you completely ignore all the obvious privacy issues and how easily-bypassed it is. People’s faces just have far too weak a correlation with their age to get the kind of bright line result a law like this needs.
Uploading ID is a better option. Still bad because it kills all anonymity/pseudonimity and introduces enormous privacy risks. And is still not difficult to bypass. But if options for age verification were political parties, this would be the LNP, to facial-aging-AI’s One Nation.
TimePencil@infosec.exchange 1 day ago
@SuperMoosie
Look, here's the bottom line(s):
1.
'Age verification' systems - where a person's ID is submitted - will not work.
Kids will find a way around them.
ID verification systems are a privacy nightmare and something only a dictatorship would implement.
2.
Device/OS/platform 'age restriction' features are workable, but Labor is too incompetent to liaise with the EU to implement them.
3.
It is for parents to supervise and control their kids' devices, NOT for everyone else to have to provide ID just to access social media.
@Zagorath