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

Privacy

9604 readers
59 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
[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 104 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 42 points 6 days ago

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

[–] eli@lemmy.world 63 points 6 days 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 39 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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

[–] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 28 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 47 points 6 days ago (2 children)

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

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 31 points 6 days ago

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

[–] DarthPub@retrofed.com 31 points 6 days ago

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

[–] webkitten@piefed.social 29 points 6 days ago

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

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days 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 6 points 6 days 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

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 27 points 6 days 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 7 points 6 days ago

Agreed. Or locked bootloaders for that matter

[–] hraegsvelmir@ani.social 16 points 6 days 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 17 points 6 days 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.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago (2 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!

[–] ThomasWilliams@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Well the MP who brought the bill forward has said people who criticise Israel should be imprisoned.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Exactly what this legislation is ultimately for, and what all those giant data centers are really going to be for. Takes a lot of storage to monitor all your citizens.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jtrek@startrek.website 12 points 6 days 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)

[–] kaotic@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

So, more people learning to compile kernels eh?

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 11 points 6 days ago (2 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?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] excral@feddit.org 9 points 6 days 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

[–] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ThomasWilliams@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

You won't be able to access any restricted sites without an age code.

Windows does not require you to verify your age.

[–] msokiovt@lemmy.today 11 points 6 days 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.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

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

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago

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

[–] lechekaflan@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Fuck you, Peter.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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 6 days ago

...because doing it at the state level is going so well

I hate corporate lobbyists

load more comments
view more: next ›