this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2026
767 points (98.5% liked)
Technology
83831 readers
3480 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Obviously everyone here hates this, but I'm gonna offer another perspective here and prepare for the down votes I guess.
There is a very good argument for OS level age 'tracking' as a means of creating a cohesive environment for software and websites to operate without having to implement individual age verification. The biggest actual issue here is how the OS determines what the user's age is. If this is implemented similar to what California has done, the OS would simply ask for the user's age at setup, and store that value, which can then be reported to programs and websites as needed. This would allow parents to setup a device for the child and not have to separately implement parental controls on every individual conceivable program, which are often easily circumvented. This would undermine any individual website's attempts to use age verification as an excuse to collect government ID data, and the security risks inherent to that.
There's no need to put any kind of validation onto this, it should simply be self-reported.
Now admittedly I don't trust our government to implement this in any kind of reasonable way so I definitely understand and respect the outrage, but I guess I'm just trying to find some positive aspect of how this might be implemented.
Sure, make it an optional field that you can fill in with whatever. Don't make laws requiring it though.
The system D thing was optional and self reported and had no call home.
Dude got fucking death threats over it
You LITERALLY can't win.
Absolutely not, age data is biometric data. It can and will be used to fingerprint you.
This isn't why those pushing for want it. It isn't about the kids safety but harvesting more information so they can tie all the other tracking data they have to a individual. its alway think of the children but lets make some money while we are at it.
This is steel-manning an argument for a feature no one wants which is most likely the thin end of the wedge for increased surveillance and censorship.
This is just how it starts so they can trick well meaning developers into making websites and platforms which make use of this verification while it is still self-ID, but when the laws become more demanding and require connecting your user account to your real-world identity, it'll already be too late, all of your online activity can be tied back to you.
When I make this argument, people like to call it a slippery slope, but the fact is that there are so many nations cracking down on free, unmonitored access to the internet, with social media restrictions, platforms like Discord requiring you to provide identification, and so on.
All for this, all of that risk, all for a feature that adds very little value to the computing experience of anyone.
Wrong. There are things that belong at the application level and others that belong in user space. Fundamentally it doesn’t make sense for any sort of mandate.
TF should I have to put my age or any other personal information into my pihole or any other system I’m running.
See I would be fine with this. A user input. Cannot be modified after installation. The parent installs the OS, the kid is locked down. Easy.
I'd suggest it would need to be per-user. Family computers are a lot less common nowadays, but are still a thing
Maybe not family computers so much any more, but shared devices, absolutely.
It still needs to be per user, per app. If I hand my phone to my kid or my niece, I don't need them looking up or accidentally seeing adult content because the apps don't ask anymore.
If the apps stop asking the user, and instead just query the OS, there's no longer any connection to the current user. So porn sites, for example, or any app that might have adult-only content, would still have to ask. In which case - what's the point of the OS age requirement? This is in no way more secure than the apps or websites just asking the user.
What about servers? I have several devices in my house that serve content to the rest of the house or provide other services. Would they need my birthday, even though my kids use the services? What about gaming consoles, or TVs? IoT devices? Does my thermostat, garage door opener, living room lamp, or washing machine need my birthdate?
This whole thing is truly a slippery slope that hasn't been thought through, at least on its face. Unless, of course, the whole point of this legislation has nothing to do with "protecting children".