[avarun]

This bill is a strictly better version of the age gating initiatives that have been passed in other states and countries like the UK and Australia. If age gating is inevitable, and it seems as though it is, this is the least bad way to do it — enforcing the onus on device manufacturers, who can do verification one time and then throw away the information.

[_heimdall]

> If age gating is inevitable

What could possibly make it inevitable? We are either okay with those with authority forcing us to ID ourselves in some form or we aren't.

[userbinator]

and it seems as though it is

Only with that attitude will it be.

[g-b-r]

It would easily mean that you're required to have an unmodified device, running a locked down system, to be able to access any service that uses age verification.

Although, a much more sensible alternative, would be to have parents (that do want the control) give their sons devices that send the "minor alert" signal, and have the services detect that.

[g-b-r]

Of course all these measures risk making identifying minors trivial for any website and app, which is... not really ideal

[g-b-r]

And this specific proposal seems to let anyone know if your kid is:

(A) Under five years of age.

(B) At least 5 years of age and under 10 years of age.

(C) At least 10 years of age and under 13 years of age.

(D) At least 13 years of age and under 16 years of age.

It seems a menu, I wonder what could go wrong....