People responding to this are right about their actual intentions, but yeah. I think if you wanted to go about doing this the right way it would be an “I’m an adult” or a “this device is primarily used by a child” checkmark that could be locked down behind an administrative password.
That’s it. That’s all you really need if your intention was actually just makeing sure kids couldn’t wander into a part of the internet not made for them. Everything else, verification, that’s just surveillance bullshit being bolted on top.
frongt@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
It’s because the goal is surveillance
ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 1 day ago
But who the fuck is actually introducing these bills? Which entity/organisation/individual/company are they getting the ideas from?
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 1 day ago
Palantir
richardwallass@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
The dark side
Dazed_Confused@lemmy.world 1 day ago
There is a (conspiracy) theory that Meta lobbies this shit in order to avoid having to verify the users’ age and not being culpable in case a minor uses their service.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 14 hours ago
i think its THIEL’s palinitir, mostly because its already being used LEO and through flock as well.
brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I buy that. It fits with literally all of Meta’s previous behavior and lobbying efforts.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 14 hours ago
THiel’s palinitir, he has been in the news ALOT lately talking about surveillance with his palinitir AI, plus its already being used by LEO.
nforminvasion@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Thiel and the Heritage Foundation
ThomasWilliams@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
The mainstream media.