Full title: EU’s new social media child protection rules to require all social media accounts to produce state ID - Leaked documents suggest that some existing accounts will also be subject to identification checks

  • poopkins@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Ursula von der Leyen, making the internet progressively worse year by year. Cookie banners, GDPR consent dialogs, and now ID verification. Please just retire and take up a different hobby, like knitting.

  • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    My freedom shouldn’t be implied cause some parent can’t use a parental control which is already mandatory in the eu. Your kids isn’t my responsability.

    It s unreal that the “free world” want my id simply to go online.

    Also same shit as rgpd. Only bigger website and corporation can afford putting million toward implementing thoses policiesbwhile all other won’t bother and just cut acces to be in compliance.

    • Puddinghelmet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      How is your freedom reduced tho, an app produces a yes or no, how is that a reduction of freedom. Search for zero-knowledge proof and the techniques behind it
      Sources for ZKP: https://ageverification.dev/av-doc-technical-specification/docs/annexes/annex-B/annex-B-zkp/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptic_Curve_Digital_Signature_Algorithm Vulnerabilities: https://www.encryptionconsulting.com/education-center/what-is-ecdsa/ [Api2025] Rutchathon Chairattana-Apirom, Franklin Harding, Anna Lysyanskaya, and Stefano Tessaro, “Server-Aided Anonymous Credentials,” available at https://eprint.iacr.org/2025/513, 2025

    • recarsion@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I hate how effective the whole “think of the children” rhetoric is. Every person I talked to about this irl is either indifferent or even in support because they want children protected and they “don’t do anything they need to hide” anyway so they don’t mind presenting an ID… I agree children should not be on social media, but it’s kinda just the parent’s responsibility to not let them near it and the tools are out there. Plus let’s not pretend kids aren’t smart enough to figure out there’s alternatives…

    • youmaynotknow@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      19 hours ago

      This is what it’s about. My daughter started reaching sites I had explicitly blocked in her phone and our home network (OPNSense + AdGuard Home) using a VPN.

      I dis not blame the sites, or the ISP, or even the VPN provider. She has a PC and Phone because we, her parents, allowed it, so that’s on her for choosing to circumvent the security implemented, and on US for providing the means.

      So, she has no access to any technology until further notice. Why the fuck does everyone have to pay because some of us are not parenting correctly?

      I certainly don’t want any company or government deciding what my kids can or cannot have access to, that’s my role, not theirs.

  • brownsugga@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Eliminating online privacy has always been framed as “protecting children” and it’s always been 100% about surveillance

    • unidentifiedfelineobject@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      even taking the pretense at face value, this would just be adults damning kids who are queer, autistic and/or in abusive households/communities (among others) and patting themselves on the back

      always scrambling to “protect” kids without ever considering their needs or why they engage in the behavior they do at all

      (assuming they’re not just seen as defective goods to be either “corrected” or disposed of, of course)

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    1 day ago

    EU’s new social media child protection state surveillance rules to require all social media accounts to produce state ID

    FTFY

    • Eternal192@anarchist.nexus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 days ago

      If she wasn’t corrupt and incompetent people wouldn’t say that about her, so maybe she should improve her bad reputation or step down as incompetent supreme.

      • mbirth 🇬🇧@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 day ago

        You’re talking about someone that had her floor in the EU building fortified, only allowing access for a few selected people. Does that look like she intends to improve her reputation to you?

  • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    That stuff would 100% get leaked and ruin many lives. Hell it would ruin lives even if only authorized authorities have access to it because some perverted cops or politicians will abuse it to stalk women and children. They‘re already doing it but getting a live feed of someone’s online activity by typing in a single number makes it so much more convenient for bad actors. And it would also get leaked on top of it.

  • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 day ago

    Ironically, kids might still get around the new restriction by using a virtual private network (VPN) connection, which virtually positions the computer in another country, at the time of signing up.

    This is just going to be one long pointless game of whackamole and as effective as Prohibition was in the US.

    • Séimhe (sé / é)@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      The US claim they are going after the VPN companies now too. Of course it could be all lies and deflection like most things they say now.

      • Lysergid@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s nonsense, VPN is tool needed to run companies. Even if they make VPNs business only, people will just register fake businesses

        • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          19 hours ago

          There is no such thing as “fake business”. The point is that the government identifies you when you want to use a VPN, so it’s either gonna be through your personal ID or through a business where you also register with the government and then they obviously also know your identity.

          • Lysergid@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            By fake I mean business which officially registered but effectively does nothing, files 0 profit tax forms and pays just enough fees to keep it formally open. It doesn’t hide your identity from government but it does allow you to access content via countries where there is no age verification thus companies don’t get your id

        • Séimhe (sé / é)@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          22 hours ago

          It’s not just about business use, but citizen access to content. I looked it up and this is the stage it’s at now https://gizmodo.com/the-first-us-law-targeting-vpn-use-takes-effect-september-3-heres-what-happen-2000805001

          The new law is narrow. VPN companies say they can’t do it. Fines for businesses that don’t are real. It’s all a little strange.

          Very few people will set up their own business or technical venture, though. That’s enough to have a chilling effect.

  • Pxtl@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    Honestly? State ID is better than the current solution which is giving Thiel-affiliated companies photo and other data.

    Ideally I’d rather have a governments provided digital ID that’s more secure and just gives the company limited metadata instead of full ID info provided from gov’t to company. Put in rules requiring warrants or subpoenas for lookups.