interru

Sadly, the thread that I wanted to reply to was deleted before I managed to finish my reply. The context is the European age verification implementation. --- I'm against the entire idea of creating an infrastructure whose only purpose is to discriminate people. It's a system that is designed to discriminate (age) while it discriminates (nationality), and that theoretically can be used to discriminate other aspects. I don't care how fancy and cool the cryptography behind that is. This thing shouldn't be improved; it should be burned to the ground!

@Karcsesz@equestria.socialhaving this system as an option is an improvement over current private sector solutionsThis isn't about replacing private age verification implementations. It's an attempt to force age verification everywhere. The main reason people object to age verification is that it's privacy invasive. With this solution they can divide those people and counter one of the main arguments against age verification. This comes at a time when there are initiatives to ban access to social media entirely for children. This is an attack on freedom of expression. People ignore that children also have human rights. And just think about the implications for the Fediverse.And to be fair, they do identify a valid symptom of curious kids with overworked (or absent) parents getting in harm's way.If parents are so absent that they can't do their job as parents, then that's something the child welfare agency should deal with. Parental neglect is the main catalyst that's extremely harmful here. Many psychological disorders are caused by parental neglect.