[Oleksa_dr]

I believe it is necessary to implement this at the OS level. This has been needed for a long time, because the “goodwill” approach never works.

The introduction of age verification is something that was to be expected with the growth in the use of the web, rather than individual programs. But there are a bunch of ways to get around it, which you do, but no one will punish you. This way, you will have parental control and transfer it to the website, while facilitating control over minors' access to unwanted content. And this way, websites do not need to implement their own terrible age verification methods. And when people complain that this is a problem for parents, this is exactly what will help parents: once they set the age in parental controls, programs and websites will have to monitor access (following the law, not goodwill).

This way, access can be controlled at the first level, i.e., at the OS level. There is a law, and there will be others to help improve it. In the same way, you can avoid the use of identifiers and, in general, face verification and a bunch of nonsense.

Ultimately, the responsibility lies with parents who did not specify the user's age on the device. But there may be “products” that ignore information from the OS.

Current parental controls do not solve the problem well, because you have to pay for a bunch of questionable products, sacrificing privacy. And it still does not protect against outdated black/white lists. Therefore, the requirement at the OS level to have such control and place responsibility on “products” is an excellent solution in my opinion.

And quite an elegant one at that. Without involving any government identifiers or anything else.

Combined with the widespread implementation of TPM, this will become even more feasible.

[akersten]

I don't know how you can say this:

> And quite an elegant one at that. Without involving any government identifiers or anything else.

and this:

> There is a law, and there will be others to help improve it.

> Combined with the widespread implementation of TPM, this will become even more feasible.

Without coming to the obvious conclusion that the next step will be even further down the road of tying your every action back to a real, verified, trackable identity.

[Oleksa_dr]

Everyone misuses terms: obviously, understandably, 99%. And a bunch of other nonsense, both from supporters and opponents. And what will you achieve? Nothing. What is your decision: to put this on each program separately and let a bunch of scumbags have photos, ages, and other data about your children that can be used for persecution? Or to simplify parental control with a single simple mechanism based on the OS and protocol? And thus put control in the hands of parents and responsibility for content violations on content providers. Then there would be no need for any terrible checks with a bunch of data stored who knows where by who knows whom.

[Aachen]

In your opinion, who should be in charge of the OS? Can I make my own (where you select an age per user upon installing the machine and upon creating subsequent users), or must it be government-sanctioned such that the age verification is watertight?

[Oleksa_dr]

The OS itself provides the client with an API containing simple information about whether the user is an adult or a minor. It is also possible to have a requirement from TPM. The age is specified by the administrator. It is possible to come up with some kind of state ID signature in TPM. The programs themselves have no way of finding out more.