[Rebuff5007]

Why are those things naturally "whats next"?

We allow bars and car companies to verify age before conducting business. Does that in itself lead to racial discrimination? I think not.

[usrnm]

The issue is the scale and centralization of information. Let's imagine that every bar has to not only check the id of every customer but do it automatically: every time you enter a bar anywhere in the country you must have your id scanned by a government-issued system. Are you still ok with it?

[stymaar]

That's why we need privacy preserving designs.

But saying “we must abandon the idea of age verification in bar” is never going to work in any democratic setting.

Voters genuinely want to protect the children, without second thoughts.

[jonathanstrange]

Why do parental software / settings and filters not work? Aren't there even approaches based on whitelisting?

[intended]

One aspect is that you are pitting parents and developing brains against the most over-designed products humanity has created.

A second order effect of this is that a small number of parents have the ability to manage their kids use of tech.

A side effect of that is kids seeing their peers use tech. I’ve seen 9 month babies getting hypnotized by screens.

This is excluding situations with an antagonist preying on the child, such as grooming or bullying.

Yes, in an ideal world, it would all go down to parenting. Since we live in reality, some of that work is shifting to ensuring defaults are in place.

I thought it was a great question. I wish I remembered more details and had the links ready.

[jonathanstrange]

> Yes, in an ideal world, it would all go down to parenting. Since we live in reality, some of that work is shifting to ensuring defaults are in place.

No, they aren't in place at all. It's the parents' job and vast majority of parents do it fine. Nobody wants the Nanny state you propagate.

[stymaar]

> Nobody wants the Nanny state you propagate.

“You don't even exist, you don't count”.

Come on! Of course some people want it, you are literally arguing with a bunch of these very people right now!

[Rebuff5007]

Sure why not. How is that any different that what already happens at airports?

[ligne]

I reckon if you applied an airport level of surveillance to go out for a drink, you'd destroy the hospitality industry in under a week.

[stymaar]

Only if you apply the same amount of bureaucracy. Most people don't care about the surveillance part at all as long as the UX is convenient (which is why the “I don't have anything to hide” is frustratingly so common).