[phatfish]

Someone in another post was claiming there was a "right" to anonymity on the internet. That was news to me.

The "rights" of my children to not be exploited by Zuckerberg and the rest of them are far more important as far as I'm concerned.

To counter the privacy nuts, no age gates and social media bans won't lead to a North Korean style government. If anything it is the antidote as children will have a chance to grow without being radicalised by the attention stealing algorithms. The Stasi in East Germany did rather well without internet age gates.

[ETH_start]

The KYC/permissioning of the web will be abused by governments to censor dissent and cutoff dissidents from the internet.

You're free to put child-safe software on your personal computer at home. Your desire to keep your kids safe doesn't justify stripping everyone else's right to permissionlessly access the internet. Having to get the permission of a gatekeeper (who, at first, will only verify you're an adult, but tomorrow, will verify your speech is not subversive) to access the internet subordinates the populace to the state in a dramatic fashion.

[inigyou]

I think we could do well with a right to send and receive IP packets without providing ID. Services built on top of this infrastructure would be allowed to either require ID or not require it.

The only part the government needs to get involved in, is to ensure devices have a parental controls option that works. This may require including parental controls information in certain packets but provide no further restrictions once the client is known not to be using them.