Seattle

1989 readers

104 users here now

A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

steelrat@lemmy.world

An online age verification law is being considered in Washington State (HB 2112) (app.leg.wa.gov)

submitted 3 days ago by AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today to c/seattle@lemmy.world

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/53271240

https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2112&Initiative=false&Year=2025

To hell with this.

The first public hearing is this Friday, January 16, in-person and online. If you live in Washington, you can file a comment in advance rather than attend the hearing. Follow the link above and hit the "Send a comment to your legislators" button.

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] MrJukes@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I contacted my rep and they got back to me. Made me feel a bit better about it going forward. Hopefully not just blowing smoke.

"Thanks for your message. HB 2112 has an extremely long path ahead before it could reach a place where I would have a vote on it, but I share your skepticism about the effectiveness of the proposed approach and will keep your concerns in mind in the unlikely event that the bill advances to the Senate floor in the 2026 session.

Best wishes, Jamie

Senator Jamie Pedersen

Majority Leader

43rd Legislative District"

[–] TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Another surveillance law parading as concern for children.

[–] Fedegenerate@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

UK here. Don't do it, it's dumb. Worse, it's harmful, our children don't have access to sex-ed resources due to this law. It only benefits the rich and the nonces.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why this is dumb: Complying with these kind of requirements in any meaningful way is nearly impossible. Online age verification systems are easily circumvented at best. At worst, they require users to share lots of sensitive personal information, creating a great target for hackers. So most sites will just block traffic from the state, and anyone with half a brain cell will just use a VPN to get around the block.

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

"Ahh, so we also ban VPNs, got it." - Actual politicians in the UK

Man, I really support the idea of preventing children from partaking in many online activities, as they've been proven harmful to kids, but there's just no good way to implement it.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean, the best way to protect kids from harmful online material is to do things like limit and monitor their time online. But you can't reasonably do that forever, so talk to them about the things they will encounter and keep that line of discussion open and honest. Trying to use technology to do the work of good parenting is lazy and ineffective.

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Good parenting is always the answer to things like this, but parents are seemingly incapable of being good parents. That's why I support the idea of something like this, as children should be protected from these awful social media companies that could not care less about the wellbeing of these kids, and parents seem to be incapable of managing it themselves.