Skip to content

Mastodon says it doesn't 'have the means' to comply with age verification laws

Technology
201 85 36
  • I think this starts to not work when you start to include other states that want to do this, other countries, cities, counties, etc.. How many trusted authorities should there be and how do you prevent them from being compromised and exploited to falsely verify people? How do you prevent valid certs from being sold?

    Some examples of the type of service you mentioned:

    I can only verify with my own government. The rest I don't know. But shut up, that's how it works! /s

    To be honest, I have no clue. But dropping my pants to write a mail isn't what I want to do.

  • Government sets up page to verify age. You head to it, no referrer. Age check happens by trusted entity (your government, not some sketchy big tech ass), they create a signed cert with a short lifespan to prevent your kid using the one you created yesterday and without the knowledge which service it is for. It does not contain a reference to your identity. You share that cert with the service you want to use, they verify the signature, your age, save the passing and everyone is happy. Your government doesn't know that you're into ladies with big booties, the big booty service doesn't know your identity and you wank along in private.

    But oh no, that wouldn't work because think of the... I have no clue.

    The service provider could even generate a certificate request that the age verification entity signs (again, with no identifying information, other than "I need an age verification signature, please"). That certificate would only be valid for that specific service provider and can't be re-used.

  • Government sets up page to verify age. You head to it, no referrer. Age check happens by trusted entity (your government, not some sketchy big tech ass), they create a signed cert with a short lifespan to prevent your kid using the one you created yesterday and without the knowledge which service it is for. It does not contain a reference to your identity. You share that cert with the service you want to use, they verify the signature, your age, save the passing and everyone is happy. Your government doesn't know that you're into ladies with big booties, the big booty service doesn't know your identity and you wank along in private.

    But oh no, that wouldn't work because think of the... I have no clue.

    It does not contain a reference to your identity.

    but they know who they issued it to, and can secretly subpoena your data from your instance.

    no thank you.

  • The service provider could even generate a certificate request that the age verification entity signs (again, with no identifying information, other than "I need an age verification signature, please"). That certificate would only be valid for that specific service provider and can't be re-used.

    I give it 2 years till Netflix requires you to have an ID every time you open the app because it has rated R movies.

    This is the same principle. The account holder agreement should make the account holder responsible for the use of the service.

    The government shouldn't be parenting our minors, their guardians should be.

    Otherswise we should put digital locks on every beer bottle, pack of cigarettes, blunt raps, car door, etc. That requires you to scan your ID before every use.

    "Kids shouldn't be driving cars, it isn't safe!"
    Yes, but somehow we have made it 100 years without requiring proof of age/license to start the car.

    And the car is far more deadly than them seeing someone naked.

  • Government sets up page to verify age. You head to it, no referrer. Age check happens by trusted entity (your government, not some sketchy big tech ass), they create a signed cert with a short lifespan to prevent your kid using the one you created yesterday and without the knowledge which service it is for. It does not contain a reference to your identity. You share that cert with the service you want to use, they verify the signature, your age, save the passing and everyone is happy. Your government doesn't know that you're into ladies with big booties, the big booty service doesn't know your identity and you wank along in private.

    But oh no, that wouldn't work because think of the... I have no clue.

    That sounds like a very functional and rational solution to the problem of age verification. But age verification isn't the ultimate goal, it's mass surveillance, which your solution doesn't work for.

  • I give it 2 years till Netflix requires you to have an ID every time you open the app because it has rated R movies.

    This is the same principle. The account holder agreement should make the account holder responsible for the use of the service.

    The government shouldn't be parenting our minors, their guardians should be.

    Otherswise we should put digital locks on every beer bottle, pack of cigarettes, blunt raps, car door, etc. That requires you to scan your ID before every use.

    "Kids shouldn't be driving cars, it isn't safe!"
    Yes, but somehow we have made it 100 years without requiring proof of age/license to start the car.

    And the car is far more deadly than them seeing someone naked.

    Oh, I was thinking the certificate would only be needed for signups - once the account is created, it absolutely should be on the account holder, not the service provider.

  • Government sets up page to verify age. You head to it, no referrer. Age check happens by trusted entity (your government, not some sketchy big tech ass), they create a signed cert with a short lifespan to prevent your kid using the one you created yesterday and without the knowledge which service it is for. It does not contain a reference to your identity. You share that cert with the service you want to use, they verify the signature, your age, save the passing and everyone is happy. Your government doesn't know that you're into ladies with big booties, the big booty service doesn't know your identity and you wank along in private.

    But oh no, that wouldn't work because think of the... I have no clue.

    Age check happens by trusted entity (your government, not some sketchy big tech ass), they create a signed cert with a short lifespan to prevent your kid using the one you created yesterday and without the knowledge which service it is for.

    Sorry, not sufficient.

    Not secure.

    " I certify that somebody is >18, but I don't say who - just somebody "

    This is an open invitation to fraud. You are going to create at least a black market for these certificates, since they are anonymous but valid.

    And I'm sure some real fraudsters have even stronger ideas than I have.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Lucky for Mastodon and other ActivityPub projects, they don't need to host any servers. People outside of regions where age verification is required can host the servers instead.

  • Oh, I was thinking the certificate would only be needed for signups - once the account is created, it absolutely should be on the account holder, not the service provider.

    Why not apply this to the ISP account holder and trust them to protect their own kids the way they see fit?

  • That sounds like a very functional and rational solution to the problem of age verification. But age verification isn't the ultimate goal, it's mass surveillance, which your solution doesn't work for.

    The fact that they haven't gone for this approach that delivers age verification without disclosing ID, when it's a common and well known pattern in IT services, very strongly suggests that age verification was never the goal. The goal is to associate your real identity with all the information data brokers have on you, and make that available to state security services and law enforcement. And to do this they will gradually make it impossible to use the internet until they have your ID.

    We really need to move community-run sites behind Tor or into i2p or something similar. We need networks where these laws just can't practically be enforced and information can continue to circulate openly.

    The other day my kid wanted me to tweak the parental settings on their Roblox account. I tried to do so and was confronted by a demand for my government-issued ID and a selfie to prove my age. So I went to look at the privacy policy of the company behind it, Persona. Here's the policy, and it's without a doubt the worst I've ever seen. It basically says they'll take every last bit of information about you and sell it to everyone, including governments.

    So I explained to my kid that I wasn't willing to do this. This is a taste of how everything will be soon.

  • Lucky for Mastodon and other ActivityPub projects, they don't need to host any servers. People outside of regions where age verification is required can host the servers instead.

    But what if govt block the site hosted outside? And the VPNs require you to do an age verification?

  • Age check happens by trusted entity (your government, not some sketchy big tech ass), they create a signed cert with a short lifespan to prevent your kid using the one you created yesterday and without the knowledge which service it is for.

    Sorry, not sufficient.

    Not secure.

    " I certify that somebody is >18, but I don't say who - just somebody "

    This is an open invitation to fraud. You are going to create at least a black market for these certificates, since they are anonymous but valid.

    And I'm sure some real fraudsters have even stronger ideas than I have.

    What stops non-anonymous certificates from being sold?

    If John Doe views way too much porn, then you expect the site to shut him down? They have no ability to track other site usage. The authorities have to block him after the 10,000th download.

    At that point, why does the site need to know? Either the government blocks someone's ID or they don't

  • But what if govt block the site hosted outside? And the VPNs require you to do an age verification?

    Good luck blocking Tor or I2P. China already tried that.

  • Government sets up page to verify age. You head to it, no referrer. Age check happens by trusted entity (your government, not some sketchy big tech ass), they create a signed cert with a short lifespan to prevent your kid using the one you created yesterday and without the knowledge which service it is for. It does not contain a reference to your identity. You share that cert with the service you want to use, they verify the signature, your age, save the passing and everyone is happy. Your government doesn't know that you're into ladies with big booties, the big booty service doesn't know your identity and you wank along in private.

    But oh no, that wouldn't work because think of the... I have no clue.

    Ideally, it would be handled directly on the hardware. Allow people to verify their logged in profile, using a government-run site. Then that user is now verified. Any time an age gate needs to happen, the site initiates a secure handshake directly with the device via TLS, and asks the device if the current user is old enough. The device responds with a simple yes/no using that secure protocol. Parents can verify their accounts/devices, while child accounts/devices are left unverified and fail the test.

    Government doesn’t know what you’re watching, because they simply verified the user. People don’t need to spam an underfunded government site with requests every day, because the individual user is verified. And age gates are able to happen entirely in the background without any additional effort on the user’s side. The result is that adults get to watch porn without needing to verify every time, while kids automatically get a “you’re not age-verified” wall. And kids can’t MITM the age check, due to the secure handshake. And if it becomes common enough, even a VPN would be meaningless as adult sites will just start requiring it by default.

    For instance, on a Windows machine, each individual user would be independently verified. So if the kid is logged into their account, they’d get an age wall. But if the parent is logged into their verified account, they can watch all the porn they want. Then keeping kids away from porn is simply a matter of protecting your adults’ computer password.

    But it won’t happen, because protecting kids isn’t the actual goal. The actual goal is surveillance. Google (and other big tech firms like them) is pushing to enact these laws, because they have the infrastructure set up to verify users. And requiring verification via those big tech firms allows them to track you more.

  • It does not contain a reference to your identity.

    but they know who they issued it to, and can secretly subpoena your data from your instance.

    no thank you.

    They (the govt) would know that they issued a certificate to ex. lemmy.dbzer0.com

    They can't know that the certificate is issued to conmie

    Unless, of course, the instance logs the age certificate used by each user

    And also, unless the govt's age verification service logs the certificate issued by each citizen

  • Why not apply this to the ISP account holder and trust them to protect their own kids the way they see fit?

    Philosophically I agree with you. I was just discussing a technological way to accomplish age verification without giving up users' identities to a service provider, or the government knowing what service you're using. Unfortunately, too many governments want to know what you're doing inside your pants.

  • Philosophically I agree with you. I was just discussing a technological way to accomplish age verification without giving up users' identities to a service provider, or the government knowing what service you're using. Unfortunately, too many governments want to know what you're doing inside your pants.

    Yeah, there is likely a tech answer to this that would work. Coming up with one and them choosing not to use it makes it even more clear kids’ safety isn’t their goal.

  • Government sets up page to verify age. You head to it, no referrer. Age check happens by trusted entity (your government, not some sketchy big tech ass), they create a signed cert with a short lifespan to prevent your kid using the one you created yesterday and without the knowledge which service it is for. It does not contain a reference to your identity. You share that cert with the service you want to use, they verify the signature, your age, save the passing and everyone is happy. Your government doesn't know that you're into ladies with big booties, the big booty service doesn't know your identity and you wank along in private.

    But oh no, that wouldn't work because think of the... I have no clue.

    Because it's not actually about age verification, it's about totalizing surveillance of everyone.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Hey, UK! When you are being compared to Mississippi, you are fucking up very very badly.

  • That sounds like a very functional and rational solution to the problem of age verification. But age verification isn't the ultimate goal, it's mass surveillance, which your solution doesn't work for.

    Don't forget censorship.

  • Precision in Focus: North America Clinical Microscopes Market

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • DIY experimental Redox Flow Battery kit

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    37 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    58 Aufrufe
    C
    The roadmap defines 3 milestone batteries. The first is released, it's a benchtop device that you can relatively easily build on your own. It has an electrode side of 2 x 2cm2. It does not store any significant amount of energy. The second one is being developed right now, it has a cell the size of a small 3d printer bed (20x20cm) and will also not store practical amounts of energy. It will hopefully prove though that they are on the right track and that they can scale it up. The third battery only will store significant amounts of energy but in only due end of the year (probably later). Current Vanadium systems cost approx. 300-600$/kWh according to some random website I found. The goal of this project is to spread the knowledge about Redox Flow Batteries and in the medium term only make them commercially viable. The aniolyth and catholyth are based on the Zink-Iodine system in an aqueous solution. There are a bunch of other systems though, each with their trade offs. The anode and cathode are both graphite felt in the case of the dev kit.
  • 71 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    77 Aufrufe
    adespoton@lemmy.caA
    Most major content producers have agreements with YouTube such that as their content is discovered, monetization all goes to the rights holders. In general, this seems like a pretty good idea, and better than copyright maximalism. However, I’ve had original works of my own “monetized by rights holder” because they used my work (with permission) in one of their products, and so now have co-opted all expressions of my work on YouTube. So the system isn’t perfect.
  • 33 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    86 Aufrufe
    G
    Yes. I can't imagine that they will go after individuals. Businesses can't be so cavalier. But if creators don't pay the extra cost to make their models compliant with EU law, then they can't be used in the EU anyway. So it probably doesn't matter much. The Llama models with vision have the no-EU clause. It's because Meta wasn't allowed to train on European's data because of GDPR. The pure LLMs are fine. They might even be compliant, but we'll have to see what the courts think.
  • 138 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    142 Aufrufe
    toastedravioli@midwest.socialT
    ChatGPT is not a doctor. But models trained on imaging can actually be a very useful tool for them to utilize. Even years ago, just before the AI “boom”, they were asking doctors for details on how they examine patient images and then training models on that. They found that the AI was “better” than doctors specifically because it followed the doctor’s advice 100% of the time; thereby eliminating any kind of bias from the doctor that might interfere with following their own training. Of course, the splashy headline “AI better than doctors” was ridiculous. But it does show the benefit of having a neutral tool for doctors to utilize, especially when looking at images for people who are outside of the typical demographics that much medical training is based on. (As in mostly just white men. For example, everything they train doctors on regarding knee imagining comes from images of the knees of coal miners in the UK some decades ago)
  • 17 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    109 Aufrufe
    T
    That's why it's not brute force anymore.
  • 844 Stimmen
    133 Beiträge
    4k Aufrufe
    A
    reminds me of the time when something with Amazon was Indian employees
  • X/Twitter Pause Encrypted DMs.

    Technology technology
    52
    2
    255 Stimmen
    52 Beiträge
    515 Aufrufe
    L
    There may be several reasons for this. If I had to guess, they found a critical flaw and had to shut it down for security reasons.