19 ms·

Why are those things naturally "whats next"? We allow bars and car companies to verify age before conducting business. Does that in itself lead to racial discr

Why are those things naturally "whats next"? We allow bars and car companies to verify age before conducting business. Does that in itself lead to racial discrimination? I think not.

usrnm 3mo ago
The issue is the scale and centralization of information. Let's imagine that every bar has to not only check the id of every customer but do it automatically: every time you enter a bar anywhere in the country you must have your id scanned by a government-issued system. Are you still ok with it?
- stymaar 3mo ago
  That's why we need privacy preserving designs. But saying “we must abandon the idea of age verification in bar” is never going to work in any democratic setting. Voters genuinely want to protect the children, without second thoughts.
  - jonathanstrange 3mo ago
    Why do parental software / settings and filters not work? Aren't there even approaches based on whitelisting?
    - intended 3mo ago
      One aspect is that you are pitting parents and developing brains against the most over-designed products humanity has created. A second order effect of this is that a small number of parents have the ability to manage their kids use of tech. A side effect of that is kids seeing their peers use tech. I’ve seen 9 month babies getting hypnotized by screens. This is excluding situations with an antagonist preying on the child, such as grooming or bullying. Yes, in an ideal world, it would all go down to parenting. Since we live in reality, some of that work is shifting to ensuring defaults are in place. I thought it was a great question. I wish I remembered more details and had the links ready.
      - jonathanstrange 3mo ago
        > Yes, in an ideal world, it would all go down to parenting. Since we live in reality, some of that work is shifting to ensuring defaults are in place. No, they aren't in place at all. It's the parents' job and vast majority of parents do it fine. Nobody wants the Nanny state you propagate.
        stymaar 3mo ago
        > Nobody wants the Nanny state you propagate. “You don't even exist, you don't count”. Come on! Of course some people want it, you are literally arguing with a bunch of these very people right now!
        intended 3mo ago
        This is the reaction that worries me. > It's the parents' job and vast majority of parents do it fine. This is a thought terminating cliche, and it creates bastions of wilfull ignorance on what reality is. The only reason I can think of this happening is because its easier to dismiss parents, than it is to engage with the issue. That doesn't change the issue though!
- Rebuff5007 3mo ago
  Sure why not. How is that any different that what already happens at airports?
  - ligne 3mo ago
    I reckon if you applied an airport level of surveillance to go out for a drink, you'd destroy the hospitality industry in under a week.
    - stymaar 3mo ago
      Only if you apply the same amount of bureaucracy. Most people don't care about the surveillance part at all as long as the UX is convenient (which is why the “I don't have anything to hide” is frustratingly so common).

Why are those things naturally "whats next"? We allow bars and car companies to verify age before conducting business. Does that in itself lead to racial discrimination? I think not.

usrnm 3mo ago

The issue is the scale and centralization of information. Let's imagine that every bar has to not only check the id of every customer but do it automatically: every time you enter a bar anywhere in the country you must have your id scanned by a government-issued system. Are you still ok with it?

stymaar 3mo ago
That's why we need privacy preserving designs. But saying “we must abandon the idea of age verification in bar” is never going to work in any democratic setting. Voters genuinely want to protect the children, without second thoughts.
- jonathanstrange 3mo ago
  Why do parental software / settings and filters not work? Aren't there even approaches based on whitelisting?
  - intended 3mo ago
    One aspect is that you are pitting parents and developing brains against the most over-designed products humanity has created. A second order effect of this is that a small number of parents have the ability to manage their kids use of tech. A side effect of that is kids seeing their peers use tech. I’ve seen 9 month babies getting hypnotized by screens. This is excluding situations with an antagonist preying on the child, such as grooming or bullying. Yes, in an ideal world, it would all go down to parenting. Since we live in reality, some of that work is shifting to ensuring defaults are in place. I thought it was a great question. I wish I remembered more details and had the links ready.
    - jonathanstrange 3mo ago
      > Yes, in an ideal world, it would all go down to parenting. Since we live in reality, some of that work is shifting to ensuring defaults are in place. No, they aren't in place at all. It's the parents' job and vast majority of parents do it fine. Nobody wants the Nanny state you propagate.
      - stymaar 3mo ago
        > Nobody wants the Nanny state you propagate. “You don't even exist, you don't count”. Come on! Of course some people want it, you are literally arguing with a bunch of these very people right now!
        intended 3mo ago
        This is the reaction that worries me. > It's the parents' job and vast majority of parents do it fine. This is a thought terminating cliche, and it creates bastions of wilfull ignorance on what reality is. The only reason I can think of this happening is because its easier to dismiss parents, than it is to engage with the issue. That doesn't change the issue though!
Rebuff5007 3mo ago
Sure why not. How is that any different that what already happens at airports?
- ligne 3mo ago
  I reckon if you applied an airport level of surveillance to go out for a drink, you'd destroy the hospitality industry in under a week.
  - stymaar 3mo ago
    Only if you apply the same amount of bureaucracy. Most people don't care about the surveillance part at all as long as the UX is convenient (which is why the “I don't have anything to hide” is frustratingly so common).