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

• Nath@aussie.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  … I don’t believe I should have to tell a JP that I use aussie.zone.

  I wasn’t exactly proposing it as a solution, the amount of manual work it would generate to have millions of Australians going to JPs around the country with this for all their social media sites staggers the mind. But if it were to be implemented this way, I’m not really sure how to get around the issue of naming the explicit sites you visit. You don’t want it to be a blank “this person is verified on every site”, because that’ll be abused by everyone (and their kids) on every site. There needs to be some sort of personalisation to the verification.

  And before anyone proposes it: I have zero interest in you sending me your personal ID. We are not equipped to store that level of sensitive information, and this is a side-hobby. We don’t take the site anywhere near seriously enough to take that sort of responsibility on.

  source

  • Zagorath@aussie.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    We are not equipped to store that level of sensitive information

    For what it’s worth, the legislation seems pretty clear on this one point (despite being unbelievably unclear on just about every other point):

    • Government-issued ID cannot be the only way a person verifies themselves
    • If Government-issued ID is used, it cannot be stored past the length of time it takes to verify

    How that’s going to play out in practice is anybody’s guess at this point.

    source

    • Nath@aussie.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      If Government-issued ID is used, it cannot be stored past the length of time it takes to verify

      That just reverses the circle of trust. If I can’t trust the users not to lie about their age (“trust me, bro”) in a DM, then the users can’t trust me not to keep copies/sell their private information (“trust me, bro”). That’s a super-flawed verification method.

      source