• argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Such an on-device feature would either be trivial to break (if it’s an ordinary API) or be impossible to implement in an open-source browser and OS (if it’s some locked-down DRM-like thing), and the latter is not privacy-preserving because proprietary software tends to be spyware.

    If these moralizers would just shut up, go away, and stop trying to ruin the Internet, that’d be great.

    • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not necessarily.

      Recently we got a new LG TV that has an age lock option with some other family settings. The parent can turn it on with a PIN, and they can set up restrictions.
      The same approach could be used here. But this would need 2 things: obviously support by the web browser app, and support by the OS to tie app installs, uninstalls and data wipes to the parent’s code.

      To help with cases when the device is sold, maybe the parent should press a button every year that they still want this, and also receive an email notification when the period is nearing it’s end.


      But a much better solution is that parents are dealing with their children.
      They may see up some site filters, but when they notice that their child is using a workaround then it should be punished with taking away the phone.

    • sznio@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just an another HTTP header, flagging if user is an adult. Set it to False if OS reports that the account used has parental controls enabled.

      This is just meant to keep children out, not protect state secrets.

        • MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe, but if their parents failed to enable parental controls or the kids hack them, they shouldn’t be allowed to blame the websites.

          There’s already plenty of options available to parents - legislators must be made to stop blaming websites when parents don’t use those tools available to them.

    • devils_advocate@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Zero knowledge proof. Trusted issuer issues proof of birthdays. User submits proof of minimum age without disclosing additional information.

      • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That would require you to disclose proof of your real-life identity to some dubious company for the purpose of unlocking porn. Definitely not privacy-preserving.

        • devils_advocate@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The company you disclose your age and online reference to doesn’t need to know how their confirmation will be used. It could be an entity already knowledgeable (DVLA, IRS).

          But yes, if porn is the only use case then this method is self incriminating.

          • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            But yes, if porn is the only use case then this method is self incriminating.

            That is precisely the problem. It will mostly or only be used for porn.

            • MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not really. Most social media involves some rudimentary age verification, even though their age threshold is lower. Same goes for banking and interacting with government sites. Far from the only ones.