this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2025
286 points (100.0% liked)

PC Gaming

12713 readers
621 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hayvan@feddit.nl 12 points 20 hours ago

Sounds like a great plan to me. I see no way this could go wrong.

[–] caboose2006@lemmy.world 5 points 17 hours ago

What could possibly go wrong?

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 22 hours ago

What could go wrong

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 6 points 20 hours ago

I'm disappointed this wasn't the onion when I had to check.

[–] C1pher@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago

Pedo app asking for pictures of children. Ban Roblox already, Jesus Crist.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 54 points 1 day ago

How nice to ask kids who cannot consent to share pictures with that company…

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 97 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I'd be far happier if they just shut down chat under 18. The pedos will find a way to get through otherwise.

[–] atthecoast@feddit.nl 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Parents can turn off chat in the parental controls. Then I found my daughter chatting using the handheld “protest signs” in game that have customizable text…

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

It's a losing battle, but it shows your child is clever and adaptable. You're training them well.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 39 points 1 day ago (8 children)

...and how do you verify that chatters are over 18?

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

Just send one (1) child picture.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Ask for verification only to enable chat. So at least in theory it's only adults.

Or, you know; don't.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 6 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

i mean, to matter which way you go you'll have created a database of people's real identities. which is a problem.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah but at least it wouldn't be mostly children.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

did you bypass verification prompts as a child? so will they.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes, and Ana von mcfakenamesdottir the third, born jan1 1900 will be in the database forever.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

hah.

personally i think a big part of the problem is that real-name identification for things that shouldn't need it is just sort of accepted, rather than being criticised as the massive invasion of privacy that it is. whether it includes children or not is a side note in my mind.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Oh absolutely, and we should go back to 1990s anonymity

But here we are. Everything has an endoscope.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

well, we're here. but the companies and governments pushing this are already looking at possible next steps, like building systems where your real identity is used everywhere.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

And part of what I want is for children to be excluded. To not be tracked. It's a good wedge that turns their rhetoric against them.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

maybe. when china did it with their law about children not using their phones after curfew, they handled it by building a face database of everyone except children, then matching against that.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Still fucking awful, but more work and keeps kids a little safer than the opposite

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

also a very useful way to mask your true reason if your true reason is "i want to build a database of people". four horsemen of the internet type shit.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Yes but I don't think anyone but the ccp is capable of actually doing that competently at the scale of a large country. Maybe ten years ago google might've had a shot.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

doing it incompetently is arguably worse, because that involves storing way too much info and sharing it too freely.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Yeah. I'm not a fan of any if this, but nobody cares when you say 'dont be evil¹'; not being pointlessly recklessly evil isn't a serious grown-up policy. better to do a political Tesla valve; introduce competing contradictory evil, dilute the propaganda, and arrest momemtym

¹except HUAC. HUAC cares.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

you say that, but if that was the case why would ibm go to all that trouble to get an exclusion from the json user agreement clause "the software shall be used for good, not evil"?

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah they did the 30s/40s equivalent, but I don't think they still have the functional capacity to work at that scale.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

they probably do, just that we don't get to hear about it until a couple of years have passed.

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

No like i don't think they're still competent enough. Morally, sure, thry could be that evil.

If, say, Denver needed that database, they'd do it before the check cleared.

I dont think they could do it for a large country.

They would want to, they would take the contract, ans it would hire so many subcontractors cut so many corners the end product would be unrecognizable.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

i mean

Edit: sorry, reuters seems to be stripping stuff off of the link. the quote i linked to is

Technology giants Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft, and IBM were named as "central to Israel's surveillance apparatus and the ongoing Gaza destruction."

[–] cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

It takes all of them plus the Zionist state, for something smaller than California.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

fair enough. i just know ibm is a big actor with many european governments as well, more so than the others. probably by virtue of having been around a lot longer.

And certain preexisting relationships.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 41 points 1 day ago

Getting an early start on cataloging with facial recognition.

[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 62 points 1 day ago

... to access chat features.

I'm going to go ahead and click 'No'

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 47 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

No? Still no flags popping up? Bells ringing? Alright, I'm sure this is fine too. It's ~~keeping an eye on~~ protecting the kids at least.

[–] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But we obviously can't protect the kids if we don't know who they are and therefore must have a database of all their faces.

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I'm sure that couldn't possibly exist for ulterior motives. Bunch of fucking creeps.

[–] pyria@kbin.melroy.org 37 points 1 day ago

Oh yeah after it's been verified that Roblox is operated by a few pedos? Yeah this will go over wonderfully...

[–] einlander@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Looks like they are building a menu...

[–] KelvarCherry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 21 hours ago

Release the Roblox Files!

[–] Gork@sopuli.xyz 20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

How will it combat AI generated profile pictures? They're literally everywhere now, I'm seeing them in brainrot mobile games even.

[–] ThunderComplex@lemmy.today 2 points 22 hours ago

Well it’ll improve the AI profile pics to the point that you won’t recognize it’s AI. Can’t be mad at AI images if you don’t recognize 'em

[–] real_squids@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Probably with a different AI that's trained to spot that. Realistically, they won't.

load more comments
view more: next ›