Comment

Comment on Trial finds age assurance can be done, as social media ban deadline looms

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.

source

Sort:hotnew top

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.

source
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
source
- Zagorath@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  Well said
  
  source