this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026
115 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
83502 readers
2839 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
NO!
Content filtering should be local. Don't broadcast people's ages to the entire Internet. This is not only NOT the only way to do it, this is the dumbest way to do it.
Where the hell is this FUD coming from? No one is talking about broadcasting the fake age someone puts into this field. Your strawman doesn’t even make sense.
Even broadcasting that the user is a minor is idiotic.
It's not FUD. This is an assault on privacy.
What I said makes perfect sense. Instead of having every computer tell every website that it needs to censor itself, have the content filtering done locally. That's the smart way to enact this - if it weren't just an obvious an excuse to ease us into online ID verification, and not actually about the children.
What is being talked about isn’t telling websites anything. You are fundamentally misunderstanding what the change even did.
No I'm not. If your PC has a flag that tells a website it needs to block that PC from viewing it...that is information that does not need to be shared, and can be abused by the Epstein pals that are pushing this legislation.
Again, that isn’t at all what it being talked about here. You’re making up a fictitious thing to be mad at.
You're trying to constrain the conversation to not include the overall push towards exactly what I'm talking about. This specific action was in anticipation of what I'm talking about. You're naive if you think this is where they're stopping
You’re talking about a collective “they” and the ultimate result of a whole bunch of slippery slope bullshit.
It's not slippery slope when places are ALREADY implementing similar things, and there's multiple companies (like palantir) heavily involved in surveillance on a national/international scale that are pushing for this.
(Oh lOoK iTs tHe sLipPeRySloPe)[https://piefed.zip/c/technology/p/1343552/group-pushing-age-verification-requirements-for-ai-turns-out-to-be-sneakily-backed-by-open#post_replies]