Lots of US states, European countries, and Australia have introduced “age verification” regulations. They present it as the classic “save the children” talking point, but it’s really just a precursor to attribution of speech, particularly attributing your words to your real identity.
Of any type of online interaction, really.
Nah not really.
Sure, age verification undermines privacy, therefore its inevitable that its used in some way in the future to attribute statements to individuals.
However, I dont think there’s any evidence that lawmakers are introducing these laws with the intention of using them to identify people.
I agree that “think of the children” is often an indicator of privacy over reach, but there are genuine issues about which we really do need to think of the children. We do age verification for alcohol, and thats generally considered to be an appropriate way to reduce harm.
Today’s school age generation has less cognitive ability than the last. Thats a first in recorded history, and a problem that needs addressing. I agree that age verification was the wrong solution, but I do believe that was the genuine intention of our politicians.
What do you mean “no evidence”? That’s not the issue at hand here. The issue is that age verification (as implemented now) opens up these possibilities for future law makers. The reason people are concerned is because of a slippery slope.
Except there’s no evidence age verification works and plenty that it doesn’t.