this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2026
267 points (98.5% liked)

Privacy

9540 readers
616 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

  1. Be civil
  2. No spam posting
  3. Keep posts on-topic
  4. No trolling

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This appears to be part of the "Parents Decide Act" announced earlier in April by Gottheimer, as just one step in the process. So expect a lot more to come. Some bullet point plans from it:

- Require operating system developers like Apple and Google to verify users’ ages when setting up a new device, rather than relying on self-reported ages.
- Allow parents to set age-appropriate content controls from the start, including limiting access to social media, apps, and AI platforms.
- Ensure that age and parental settings securely flow to apps and AI platforms, so content is tailored appropriately for children.
- Prevent children from accessing harmful or explicit content - including inappropriate AI chatbot interactions - by creating a consistent, trusted standard across platforms.

Currently, the bill is only in the introductory stage so it hasn't yet passed and become law, so if this is important to you in the US you may want to speak to your representatives.

Source [web-archive]

I am sorry, but isn't it 99% not about "children protection" but general surveillance for everyone wrapped up in a "pretty" package that plays, again, on fears as the parenting and unforeseen future backed up with the "time-saving" features for those who are in a hurry within the same system?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lechekaflan@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

Fuck you, Peter.

[–] kaotic@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

So, more people learning to compile kernels eh?

[–] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

If it's called "parents decide" why they implement it as "government and corps decide"? 🤔

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

The people that push these laws must be shoved into a solitary confinement for the rest of their lives.

[–] excral@feddit.org 1 points 3 hours ago

"Patents decide" is a very thin veil around the personal data grab this really is. If parents so decide, they are perfectly capable to set up the correct ages for their children without handing any sensitive data over to bog tech. And if they decide to not care about age restrictions, they could still use their personal info to verify as adults on their children's devices. This bill only benefits those, who can collect even more data then

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

I dunno... Bullet points are pretty LLMy.

[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 24 points 9 hours ago

Thank GOD! FINALLY I'll get a Chance to give the Epstein Class my CHILDS personal Information!

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 13 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Another lie at the altar of protecting children. They could give a fucking rip about kids, dimmest timeline ever.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 2 points 4 hours ago

Reddit User Uncovers Who Is Behind Meta’s $2B Lobbying for Invasive Age Verification Tech

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/reddit-user-uncovers-behind-meta-154717384.html

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 6 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Unless the parents decide they want to preserve their privacy of course. What about non-parents? Why do parents get to decide for us?

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

"parents" ≈ "adults". The whole "think of the children" argument is a red herring anyways, but if you see how they are using it and which specific metaphorical levers of information control they are pulling, you can make more informed choices. At least I think that's the point of the article.

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 9 points 9 hours ago

This is stupid to do this at the OS level. Where are the small government conservatives demanding the private market meet this need? (They are liars, fools, and scumbags who don't sincerely believe what they say)

[–] hraegsvelmir@ani.social 11 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
  • Allow parents to set age-appropriate content controls from the start, including limiting access to social media, apps, and AI platforms.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most, if not all, OSes have these capabilities already? Parents already don't use them, what is supposed to make me think they'll suddenly start using them if only there was another law mandating them?

[–] Hasherm0n@lemmy.world 10 points 9 hours ago

Well it's called the "Parents Decide Act" and these things usually have opposite effects from the name, so I'm pretty sure that it's actually going to end up being a small handful of puritans deciding what's appropriate for everyone else's children.

[–] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 8 points 10 hours ago

Hate it, but I honestly think this will pass. Most people won't even notice as Windows already requires an email, so this will probably just add some sort of take a picture of your face thing. The concerning issue is when this leads websites to be able to request the identity of users. Huge chunks of the internet will basically die for anyone who cares about privacy. Linux users can ignore a lot of this, but linux will remain in the minority on all devices, and when most websites plus government websites start using it to access papers and such things... yeah then even linux users will have to figure out a work around maybe scrapers or something... It's dystopian.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Ah yes, another bill named after something it doesn’t actually do, for people who can’t actually be bothered or are unable to understand technology in order to restrict their kid(s) access anyway.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 6 points 9 hours ago

They should just name is "save all the children and you are bad person if you don't support this" act

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 81 points 17 hours ago (1 children)
[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 23 points 13 hours ago

I would like to remind viewers that image is over 20 years old, and remains relevant (even more today than it ever was).

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 38 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

The Epstein class wants to know who the minors on the internet are.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I mean I only have one person I'm interested in flirting with and I think it would be helpful to know which spaces have minors in them. Not required tho. I really don't want to be sharing bootyhole memes with 12 year olds. If I did I'd be on roblox.

Fortunately this space is small enough we've got a regular contingent of us old farts (and a few young folk) who keep dropping by. Youngest person I am aware of is 18 (and no one needs to out themselves to disapprove that).

And since it's us old farts:

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

I mean I only have one person I’m interested in flirting with and I think it would be helpful to know which spaces have minors in them.

So do pedophiles. For (hopefully) the opposite reason.

[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 187 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (2 children)

Parents Decide Act

Looks inside

Government decides

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 46 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

"Allow parents to...limit access to apps"

Which "apps"? Who determines which apps need to be age approved? Notepad? Couldn't you write something horrific and send it with that app? Better let the government take that control for you and dictate to OS creators what your kids and you see. They will of course come for your apps next.

[–] Lemming6969@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

You wouldn't believe what you can write in base64

[–] redknight942@sh.itjust.works 13 points 17 hours ago

cries in age verification pencils and pens

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 27 points 18 hours ago

They always name bill the opposite of what the bill does. It's part of the sales campaign.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 13 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Who is this legislation for? Third party "verifier" companies make tons of money, data brokers make tons of money selling info on which users are minors to advertisers and pdf files, fascist government gets "Total Information Awareness", corrupt government officials make tons of money, ... so much winning! so much money to be made!

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

You forgot the "religious fanatics get to shove their religion down other people's throat".

Stuff like that is making me unironically anti-theist.

[–] eli@lemmy.world 53 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

As a parent, I have zero faith in any system like this. I'm all for more parental controls(like what Gnome 50 just implemented), but I don't want anything(program, web browser, video game, etc) to be able to query any kind of "age" field on an account on my system.

I don't want ANYONE to know if my child is using a device. And if that means I have to create an adult account for them, then so be it. I don't want my child's information being scraped and imported into some random database that gets leaked or sold to nefarious actors.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 32 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Companies would love to know the age of a person using a device

There is a reason why Meta is pushing for age verification. They love children due to the fact that advertisers love to get children hooked early on a product. You should be very careful about who advertises to your child

[–] lemmyng@lemmy.world 80 points 20 hours ago (8 children)

GrapheneOS is about to see a huge uptick in users.

Praying that Linux phones become more daily driver options.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 49 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

GrapheneOS about to become illegal/probable cause for a terrorism charge. The goal is to criminalize everyone who opposes MAGA tyranny.

[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 6 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I'll add that to my long list of reasons to stay out of the usa.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

To be clear, that was just an expression of frustrated cynicism rather than a warning of any actual policy change. Also, it's law enforcement in Spain and France that have actually been doing stuff like that so far; I just wouldn't be surprised if US cops jumped on the bandwagon.

Can't blame you for wanting to stay away from the US, though!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 15 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Been running GrapheneOS for years now. Started with a Pixel 3, then moved to a Pixel 6 Pro, and now have it on a Pixel 9 Pro. It is ridiculously easy to install and use, and is regularly updated. I love it!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] chunes@lemmy.world 24 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Friendly reminder that anyone who writes DRM is a traitor to the human race. Find a job that won't haunt your conscience.

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 4 points 10 hours ago

Agreed. Or locked bootloaders for that matter

[–] DarthPub@retrofed.com 28 points 17 hours ago

If it’s required then parents don’t decide shit

[–] webkitten@piefed.social 24 points 18 hours ago

It doesn't sound like the parents are the ones deciding, though.

[–] msokiovt@lemmy.today 11 points 16 hours ago

Huh, another OS-level digital ID bill? Who would've known?

People are already calling this out, especially with the Jesuit class wanting everything in their power to do that.

[–] FaygoRedPop@lemmy.world 30 points 20 hours ago (14 children)

I'd be fine with this, honestly. It will justify me throwing out all of my electronics and moving to the woods to live out a simple, happy life.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Triumph@fedia.io 19 points 19 hours ago

The free flow of information empowers the proles, time to take it away.

load more comments
view more: next ›