this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2026
392 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

81759 readers
2994 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Senate Bill 26-051 reflects that pattern. The bill does not directly regulate individual websites that publish adult or otherwise restricted content. Instead, it shifts responsibility to operating system providers and app distribution infrastructure.

Under the bill, an operating system provider would be required to collect a user’s date of birth or age information when an account is established. The provider would then generate an age bracket signal and make that signal available to developers through an application programming interface when an app is downloaded or accessed through a covered application store.

App developers, in turn, would be required to request and use that age bracket signal.

Rather than mandating that every website perform its own age verification check, the bill attempts to embed age attestation within the operating system account layer and have that classification flow through app store ecosystems.

The measure represents the latest iteration in a series of Colorado efforts that have struggled to balance child safety, privacy, feasibility and constitutional limits.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hector@lemmy.today 38 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Colorodo democrats have always been lousy. Here they are following texas and montana and tennessee, locking down the internet with dishonest arguments. No one in reality thinks this is about protecting kids, and it's not the state's place to do so, it's the parents, it's a violation of the 1st amendment to make adults expose their identities to people recording everything they do online and using it against them, and selling it to the government.

We need to repeal these bills, and we need a popular open source of model legislation to counter-act ALEC, that writes these bills and state lawmakers just fill in the blanks, after the united corporations give them a plausible excuse to and pay them off

[–] jali67@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago

It is the donors influencing all of them. Corrupt fucks

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

and it’s not the state’s place to do so, it’s the parents

Not every parent is a good steward or guardian of their children, like those who have been caught cyberbullying their own children or those who send their gay/trans children to conversion camps to "pray the gay away" or even parents who deny their children life-saving vaccination and medical procedures because it conflicts with parental beliefs. A technically proficient parent who is "protecting their kids" could easily be blocking their children from access to information that is important to the child's development just as much as the government could be.

The argument that it's always fully the parents right and no one else's is an unintentional argument in favor of parents treating children like property and normalizing the ability for parents to abuse and control their children under the guise of the false idea that a parent always knows what is best for their child. Plenty of parents shat out kids while knowing fuck-all about how the world works and definitely don't know what is best for their child.

Government is imperfect, but so are parents.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If America or any other society moves to have UBI as the basis of all things, children could have personal agency. If free housing and a monthly income is available to all, alongside free education and healthcare, a child could choose to leave their family at any time. This would go a long way to preventing abuse, allow children to fulfill their personal growth, and so much more.

Family, friendship, and community should exist because people like each other, rather than being a product of authority.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Absolutely agreed, but you're still going to need a government authority for things like UBI, free housing, and deciding at what age it is reasonable for a child to be emancipated from their parents and live on their own. Obviously a four year old probably isn't going to be capable of fully caring for themselves, even if they deserve the autonomy from their abusive parents. If I recall correctly, current emancipation laws are roughly around 13 years old, which is when a child is starting to be able to competently care for themselves. However, that still leaves over a decade of potential abusive parenting where someone needs to be raising the child whether it's a good parent, or a foster parent, or a state institution. More importantly, that decade is the most important period for a child's development, especially in terms of mental health. So whether we like it or not, there still needs to be some checks on parents just doing whatever the fuck they want to their children during that period.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago

If there is universal healthcare, caretakers for the elderly and the orphaned should be available. That means a young kid can ask for a caretaker and receive that aid. Kinda like an reverse adoption, where the kid chooses the parent, rather than the other way around.

The government can send a representative to households or schools with a kid under 10 years of age, with the job of asking whether they want to stay. Do this once a year, giving the kid a tablet through which they can securely send a simple survey without showing their parent what they put on it. Depending on what the kid wants, they stay with their family or can tell the state that they are unhappy with where they are.

It wouldn't be perfect, but at least it gives pathways out of bad situations.