So the input is not verifiable? This will not work and sounds more that it’s not intended to do anything other than shift the Overton Window. California has a huge fascist issue in Silicon Valley.
The point isn’t to verify your age the point is to have the account holder (the parent) attest to the age of the user (their child). If the parent lies and it negatively impacts the child then the parent can be fined.
It also penalizes apps that see the user’s age is in a lower bracket and still shows them sensitive content.
There is a huge fascist issue everywhere in the US. SV is not special in that respect.
Just moving the Overton window is not a good argument for or against anything. If you are concerned about what data the government may gather then say that and we can have a real discussion.
I am going to assume that you are referencing the epstein files. This is not a law about that, if you want them to be prosecuted then that is something you should direct at your congressperson. Not at a state level law about age attestation.
I’m worried about collection of data. If attestation is useful, then why not just offer it as something to market for only those who need it, like parents who want to restrict for children? Just make a law that devices sold after 2026 cannot be given to kids under whatever age without attestation options. Even then, the device can have the option and not a requirement.
Edit: It’s absolutely imperative that we protect our information. Private info will be abused in the future to suppress dissent. The only reason they don’t do it more already is because then they would need to explain why human trafficking still exists and why drugs are still everywhere. They can’t both admit to having the tech while simultaneously allowing crime that the tech can prevent. They are probably making money off that type of crime. Hope that explains how I was relating everything. These measure will be used to remove your voice.
So the input is not verifiable? This will not work and sounds more that it’s not intended to do anything other than shift the Overton Window. California has a huge fascist issue in Silicon Valley.
The point isn’t to verify your age the point is to have the account holder (the parent) attest to the age of the user (their child). If the parent lies and it negatively impacts the child then the parent can be fined.
It also penalizes apps that see the user’s age is in a lower bracket and still shows them sensitive content.
There is a huge fascist issue everywhere in the US. SV is not special in that respect.
It’s just shifting the Overton Window. Don’t fall for it. How many pedophiles do you see in jail? Protect the kids my ass.
Just moving the Overton window is not a good argument for or against anything. If you are concerned about what data the government may gather then say that and we can have a real discussion.
I am going to assume that you are referencing the epstein files. This is not a law about that, if you want them to be prosecuted then that is something you should direct at your congressperson. Not at a state level law about age attestation.
I’m worried about collection of data. If attestation is useful, then why not just offer it as something to market for only those who need it, like parents who want to restrict for children? Just make a law that devices sold after 2026 cannot be given to kids under whatever age without attestation options. Even then, the device can have the option and not a requirement.
Edit: It’s absolutely imperative that we protect our information. Private info will be abused in the future to suppress dissent. The only reason they don’t do it more already is because then they would need to explain why human trafficking still exists and why drugs are still everywhere. They can’t both admit to having the tech while simultaneously allowing crime that the tech can prevent. They are probably making money off that type of crime. Hope that explains how I was relating everything. These measure will be used to remove your voice.