Discussion
"... the advocates of a social media ban for kids under 16 appear willing to ignore the privacy implications that the proposal would have *for everyone*. For a glimpse into the void, check out the United Kingdom’s Offcom advice page on the subject, which cheerily makes a case for wholesale privacy intrusions, with a minimum of reliable safety rails."
#GordonCampbell, 2025
The OffCom page Gordon links to is;
"Strong age checks can be done effectively, safely, and in a way that protects your privacy. As with everything you do online, you should exercise a degree of caution and judgement when giving over personal information."
#OffCom, 2025
For a start, AFAIK, this is a blatant lie. You can't prove your age to an online service *and* browse it anonymously. So forcing you to do it does *not* protect your privacy.
(1/2)
@strypey do you know Yivi? https://yivi.app/en/ it was developed by the Dutch Privacy by Design fdn.
Previously known as IRMA
In any case, it provides authentication with an attribute (e.g. "verified over 18 y.o.) and shields your other details. Pretty neat isn't it?
@Wtebbens
> Yivi ... provides authentication with an attribute (e.g. "verified over 18 y.o.) and shields your other details
Intriguing, thanks for the tip. I'll look into this. Good to see full source code available, some components under Apache 2.0 license;
https://github.com/privacybydesign
Thoughts @lightweight? @rabble?
Second, even if we take OffCom at their word, note they carefully say "*can* be done", not *will* be done. I don't see anything there about consequences for platforms that fail to protect our privacy, or don't even try.
Some of these companies have been blatantly ignoring our privacy rights for decades. Others have proven utterly incompetent at protecting it (*cough* Ashley Madison *cough*). Mostly with no serious consequences.
Now we're supposed to trust them with identity data?
(2/2)
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate
