Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Brybry 876 days ago
> Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require ... a covered platform to implement an age gating or age verification functionality.

Does it even have an age verification requirement? The only part I could find was it requires the NIST to investigate age verification system creation/implementation/effectiveness/impact.

I think that part should be removed but it also made me feel like the stopkosa site might be fearmongering.
2 comments
averysmallbird 875 days ago
It does not create an age verification requirement. A platform only has obligations to provide safeguards when it has knowledge that a user is 16 and under. It also provides statutory direction that it does not require further steps to infer or collect age.

(I'm staff that cowrote the bill.)

link
OkayPhysicist 876 days ago
Without age gating, a company would have to apply censorship site wide, if there is reasonable belief that the site is used by minors. That's also not great.
link
Brybry 875 days ago
In the text it says "covered platform knows is used by minors", "covered platform knows is a minor", and "platform knows is a child".

> The term “know” or “knows” means to have actual knowledge or knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances.

Is this part the reasonable belief? Or is it that the ambiguity will cause companies to age gate to try to protect themselves?

Though I don't see how an age gate would even protect companies. Say a minor lies on the age gate, illegitimately uses the site, and their parent calls in angry.

The company now knows their service is used (illegitimately) by minors, do they then have to implement protections?

link