8 ms·

Need we remind Anthropic of the 153 million drirvers licenses available for sale on the dark web thanks to a 3rd party ID verification service? https://krebson

Need we remind Anthropic of the 153 million drirvers licenses available for sale on the dark web thanks to a 3rd party ID verification service? https://krebsonsecurity.com/2026/09/fbi-probes-service-selling-153m-drivers-licenses/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2026/09/fbi-probes-service-selli... The fact that Anthropic only receives a result, not the data itself, does not make me feel any better about this. I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the companies and governments out of it.

fluidcruft 6d ago
They at least have some sort of a take a selfie and some app guesses your age based on the photo option that I had not heard of. > Accepted age verification methods > Yoti offers several ways to confirm you're 18 or over. You can choose whichever works best for you: > * Facial age estimation: Take a selfie and Yoti's technology estimates your age. No ID document needed. > * ID verification: Take a photo of your ID (such as a passport, driving license, or national ID card) and upload it from your device. See Yoti's full list of supported documents for country-specific options. > * Yoti’s Digital ID app: If you already have the Yoti app, share a verified "over 18" attribute from it.
matheusmoreira 6d ago
> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the companies and governments out of it. This is the way!
- pocksuppet 4d ago
  No it's not, it's a cop-out. You really expect every member of society to individually stand up to Anthropic? That thing you just said is not an alternative solution - it is actually an attempt to prevent the problem from being solved at all. Which is fine if you're an Anthropic shareholder and believe the problem should not be solved.
Valodim 6d ago
> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the companies and governments out of it. If you'd like to advocate for this position for a living, the tobacco, alcohol, and gambling industries will all be happy to pay you.
- throwaway323929 6d ago
  Kids do all of this stuff anyways, making it illegal doesn't stop it from happening. But we're not talking about a product that kills its users, we're talking about a polymath that can help its users build and create things. Are you intellectually prepared to believe that Claude Code is as dangerous as cigarettes, a product that kills 50% of its users? Do you genuinely believe, as a core belief, that Claude Code will kill 50% of the people that use it?
  - jachee 6d ago
    > we're not talking about a product that kills its users Yeah, it just pushes the ones with the tendency to do it themselves.
    - throwaway323929 6d ago
      Are you being sardonic, or can you seriously not tell the difference in harm between smoking cigarettes and Claude? I genuinely don't understand how you can survive in the world with a risk assessment system this damaged.
      - musha68k 6d ago
        "Think of the kids!" OK but the impact of this technology shouldn't be underestimated and one doesn't only have to read up on the extreme ends. From personal experience, have you ever "chatted" with a model outside of technical/work related stuff? Both Anthropic as well as OpenAI models have been overstepping personal (user) boundaries for years now. There are multiple reasons for why Google hasn't capitalized on the transformer much earlier.. I'm neither a proponent of the recent Zuckerberg maneuver to "protect the children!" nor of the EU based zero-knowledge proof track, but the people in those companies need to be kept accountable. The new Claude availability constraints seem to me then like a (late) hedge against any major litigations on that front.. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AI-induced_psychosis https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AI-induced_psycho...
alansaber 6d ago
Admittedly it's not as if the government is immune to massive data leaks either
Hizonner 6d ago
> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the companies and governments out of it. You do understand that in order to do that, something or somebody has (a) know that the person being decided about is a minor, (b) know who that minor's parents are, and (c) have some way to get input from the parents. You get that, right? Right? "Make it the parents' decision" doesn't solve the privacy problem. It's also probably wrong as a universal answer to anything; parents aren't infallible, incorruptible oracles.
- none2585 6d ago
  I think they meant it more as "Let parents decide if their kids can use this tool and have them prevent access to it if not."
rirze 6d ago
Unfortunately we live in a litigious society. The more you observe, you'll see that companies and government make decisions to reduce culpability and offload risk.
munificent 6d ago
> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. I am strongly sympathetic of this point. But, also, children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. This is an extremely difficult balancing act. Various laws and organizations get it wrong all the time, but it does require balance because there is no simple solution here that just works. There is a fundamental, unsolvable tension between: * In a just society, your opportunity in life should not depend on being lucky with who your parents are. * In a free society, parents should be able to support their children as they see fit. (Stephen Pinker was the first one I've seen to point out this problem.)
- alt227 6d ago
  > children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. I know my opinion is not popular, but I do not agree that it is the states responsibility to pick up the slack for bad parenting.
  - pixl97 6d ago
    Define bad parenting? Should the state do nothing about children not being sent to school? Should they go hungry when not fed? Should we just throw the kids in jail instead of programs that provide support? The libertarian "eh whatever" means of government has a lot of negative side effects too.
    - csomar 6d ago
      What do any of these have to do with you handing over you ID to some random web service?
    - siddthesquid 6d ago
      Also these kids will grow up to do harm to the communities in that state, which will spend more money at the end cleaning up those mistakes.
      - 6d ago
doright 6d ago
> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. And if your parents suck? (Mine did.) I think the power for parents to have free reign over everything in a child's life should be reduced if the parents are abusive, but of course there is no way to do this short of infallible and invasive surveillance. All to say, there is no easy solution here. Abusive parents are not going to "think of the children" either way, no matter what arguments the well-meaning parents give. They will not see a problem with their own behavior. So assuming the parent is a sacrosanct figure that always knows what's best is unworkable. I understand that no parent wants to be accused of being abusive, but just because it is taboo to say it out loud, does not mean these people do not exist. They're out there. They will fuck up their child's minds and cause long-lasting damage, Internet access or not. It's no wonder children react poorly to the Internet when the two people they have to depend on for their literal survival don't support them at a good enough level. They seek out comfort when they can't get it elsewhere and now it's supposedly a tech CEO's fault they're addicted. My life could have been different if one single adult I could trust had supported me, but I didn't get one. Not all children will, either.
- Exoristos 6d ago
  Everyone's parents "suck"--they're humans, they're learning, they have problems of their own they struggle with, etc. There are no purely good parents. I'm not excusing actually wretched family conditions, but have been noticing almost every young adult now deplores an unfair childhood--and I can't help but think we'd all be healthier if we could recognize that a childhood with some problems is statistically quite "fair."
  - dennis_jeeves2 4d ago
    Very astute observations.
- mayhemducks 6d ago
  I'm sorry your parents sucked. I sincerely hope that your ability to make better choices with your loved ones than your parents did with you brings you some comfort. In my view, removing access to information from my child would be a sucky thing to do to him. But the choice to do so is not a luxury I enjoy thanks to the billionaire ruling class.
owisd 6d ago
We already tried that. The companies had the option not to exploit kids and chose exploitation, and given trillion-dollar companies they can massively out-resource any parent's individual action - no amount of parental controls will stop a teenager saving up their pocket money and buying an inexpensive second-hand device themselves - the parents' only option to fight back is the ballot box.

fluidcruft 6d ago

They at least have some sort of a take a selfie and some app guesses your age based on the photo option that I had not heard of. > Accepted age verification methods > Yoti offers several ways to confirm you're 18 or over. You can choose whichever works best for you: > * Facial age estimation: Take a selfie and Yoti's technology estimates your age. No ID document needed. > * ID verification: Take a photo of your ID (such as a passport, driving license, or national ID card) and upload it from your device. See Yoti's full list of supported documents for country-specific options. > * Yoti’s Digital ID app: If you already have the Yoti app, share a verified "over 18" attribute from it.

matheusmoreira 6d ago

> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the companies and governments out of it. This is the way!

pocksuppet 4d ago
No it's not, it's a cop-out. You really expect every member of society to individually stand up to Anthropic? That thing you just said is not an alternative solution - it is actually an attempt to prevent the problem from being solved at all. Which is fine if you're an Anthropic shareholder and believe the problem should not be solved.

Valodim 6d ago

> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the companies and governments out of it. If you'd like to advocate for this position for a living, the tobacco, alcohol, and gambling industries will all be happy to pay you.

throwaway323929 6d ago
Kids do all of this stuff anyways, making it illegal doesn't stop it from happening. But we're not talking about a product that kills its users, we're talking about a polymath that can help its users build and create things. Are you intellectually prepared to believe that Claude Code is as dangerous as cigarettes, a product that kills 50% of its users? Do you genuinely believe, as a core belief, that Claude Code will kill 50% of the people that use it?
- jachee 6d ago
  > we're not talking about a product that kills its users Yeah, it just pushes the ones with the tendency to do it themselves.
  - throwaway323929 6d ago
    Are you being sardonic, or can you seriously not tell the difference in harm between smoking cigarettes and Claude? I genuinely don't understand how you can survive in the world with a risk assessment system this damaged.
    - musha68k 6d ago
      "Think of the kids!" OK but the impact of this technology shouldn't be underestimated and one doesn't only have to read up on the extreme ends. From personal experience, have you ever "chatted" with a model outside of technical/work related stuff? Both Anthropic as well as OpenAI models have been overstepping personal (user) boundaries for years now. There are multiple reasons for why Google hasn't capitalized on the transformer much earlier.. I'm neither a proponent of the recent Zuckerberg maneuver to "protect the children!" nor of the EU based zero-knowledge proof track, but the people in those companies need to be kept accountable. The new Claude availability constraints seem to me then like a (late) hedge against any major litigations on that front.. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AI-induced_psychosis https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AI-induced_psycho...

alansaber 6d ago

Admittedly it's not as if the government is immune to massive data leaks either

Hizonner 6d ago

> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. Leave the companies and governments out of it. You do understand that in order to do that, something or somebody has (a) know that the person being decided about is a minor, (b) know who that minor's parents are, and (c) have some way to get input from the parents. You get that, right? Right? "Make it the parents' decision" doesn't solve the privacy problem. It's also probably wrong as a universal answer to anything; parents aren't infallible, incorruptible oracles.

none2585 6d ago
I think they meant it more as "Let parents decide if their kids can use this tool and have them prevent access to it if not."

rirze 6d ago

Unfortunately we live in a litigious society. The more you observe, you'll see that companies and government make decisions to reduce culpability and offload risk.

munificent 6d ago

> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. I am strongly sympathetic of this point. But, also, children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. This is an extremely difficult balancing act. Various laws and organizations get it wrong all the time, but it does require balance because there is no simple solution here that just works. There is a fundamental, unsolvable tension between: * In a just society, your opportunity in life should not depend on being lucky with who your parents are. * In a free society, parents should be able to support their children as they see fit. (Stephen Pinker was the first one I've seen to point out this problem.)

alt227 6d ago
> children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. I know my opinion is not popular, but I do not agree that it is the states responsibility to pick up the slack for bad parenting.
- pixl97 6d ago
  Define bad parenting? Should the state do nothing about children not being sent to school? Should they go hungry when not fed? Should we just throw the kids in jail instead of programs that provide support? The libertarian "eh whatever" means of government has a lot of negative side effects too.
  - csomar 6d ago
    What do any of these have to do with you handing over you ID to some random web service?
  - siddthesquid 6d ago
    Also these kids will grow up to do harm to the communities in that state, which will spend more money at the end cleaning up those mistakes.
    - 6d ago

doright 6d ago

> I really wish we could leave these types of decisions up to parents and parents only. And if your parents suck? (Mine did.) I think the power for parents to have free reign over everything in a child's life should be reduced if the parents are abusive, but of course there is no way to do this short of infallible and invasive surveillance. All to say, there is no easy solution here. Abusive parents are not going to "think of the children" either way, no matter what arguments the well-meaning parents give. They will not see a problem with their own behavior. So assuming the parent is a sacrosanct figure that always knows what's best is unworkable. I understand that no parent wants to be accused of being abusive, but just because it is taboo to say it out loud, does not mean these people do not exist. They're out there. They will fuck up their child's minds and cause long-lasting damage, Internet access or not. It's no wonder children react poorly to the Internet when the two people they have to depend on for their literal survival don't support them at a good enough level. They seek out comfort when they can't get it elsewhere and now it's supposedly a tech CEO's fault they're addicted. My life could have been different if one single adult I could trust had supported me, but I didn't get one. Not all children will, either.

Exoristos 6d ago
Everyone's parents "suck"--they're humans, they're learning, they have problems of their own they struggle with, etc. There are no purely good parents. I'm not excusing actually wretched family conditions, but have been noticing almost every young adult now deplores an unfair childhood--and I can't help but think we'd all be healthier if we could recognize that a childhood with some problems is statistically quite "fair."
- dennis_jeeves2 4d ago
  Very astute observations.
mayhemducks 6d ago
I'm sorry your parents sucked. I sincerely hope that your ability to make better choices with your loved ones than your parents did with you brings you some comfort. In my view, removing access to information from my child would be a sucky thing to do to him. But the choice to do so is not a luxury I enjoy thanks to the billionaire ruling class.

owisd 6d ago

We already tried that. The companies had the option not to exploit kids and chose exploitation, and given trillion-dollar companies they can massively out-resource any parent's individual action - no amount of parental controls will stop a teenager saving up their pocket money and buying an inexpensive second-hand device themselves - the parents' only option to fight back is the ballot box.