this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2025
241 points (99.6% liked)

Canada

10717 readers
757 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Canada’s proposed Bill S-209, which addresses online age verification, is currently making its way through the Senate, and its passage would be yet another mistake in tech policy.

The bill is intended to restrict young peoples’ access to online pornography and to hold providers to account for making it available to anyone under 18. It may be well-intentioned, but the manner of its proposed enforcement – mandating age verification or what is being called “age-estimation technologies” – is troubling.

Globally, age-verification tools are a popular business, and many companies are in favour of S-209, particularly because it requires that websites and organizations rely on third parties for these tools. However, they bring up long-standing concerns over privacy, especially when you consider potential leaks or hacks of this information, which in some cases include biometrics that can identify us by our faces or fingerprints. [...]

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

Time to boost a specific local business and go back (...I mean, not really, I only ever had one and I won it, fun story actually) to buying porn DVDs.

[–] GodofLies@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 hours ago

"Those that trade privacy for security deserve neither."

How about they start addressing the actual problem rather than half-measures from think tanks. If it was truly about children, they should be passing policies from a macro standpoint that encourage people to have a family and kids. Right now, it's economically grim and has been sliding that way for many decades. The rise of fascist and surveillance state policies is only going to make it worse. Say bye-bye to your birthrate and we're right back where we started again with the gov trying to pump the numbers via mass immigration.

What does all this have to do with this bill? The intent may be framed as protecting/preventing kids from adult material, but it's also about making it desirable to have kids because "big brother is watching you/protecting you" (SMH here on how stupid this all is). These legislators are out of touch. We as a society need to address the root of the problem - why do we have a CSAM problem in the first place? It's a horrific thing to have, and to be honest, those that turn to it likely have a mental illness.

As for kids accessing adult material online - why is the government being a nanny state? This is the parent's job.

I have zero confidence that they can keep everyone's data private and safe given how many breaches there are.

[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 hours ago

If they were serious about privacy-preserving age verification, they'd be looking at zero-knowledge proofs. Since ZKP is not on the table, this is really about control and surveillance.

[–] SlartyBartFast@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Now we deal with this shit even here?

[–] orioler25@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 hours ago

They've been pushing this for years now.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 hours ago

It doesn't matter what Canada does. It seems the rest of the world is going this way and we we'll be dragged behind whether we do something or not. I have no idea what is happening the fall of our era?

[–] fourish@lemmy.world 11 points 19 hours ago

Well no child I know could’ve ever found porn if an adult had only blocked access....lol. The more forbidden it is, the bigger the thrill/reward of getting it.

When I was a kid, my parents always had big summer parties at our house and there was alcohol all over the place. I could try whatever I wanted (with lots of adults around - if not supervising, at least being nearby). I never cared about alcohol because casual “sampling” was never prohibited so who cares?

My kids (both under 10) have both tried mild alcoholic drinks.

When they get older into their teens, I'm making sure that as long as they are supervised, they can try any legal substance they want.

[–] RedGreenBlue@lemmy.zip 26 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It's never about porn or children. It's about control, money and a fear of ones own citizenry.

[–] jellygoose@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 hours ago

It’s also about scanning everyone’s faces for their databases, and probably to feed Palantir in the end.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Takashiro@lemmy.today 18 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

It is not a slippery slope, it is the intended purpose, with a different implementation.

Anyone with a few braincells working knows that it is all bullshit this crusade against porn "for the kids" .

In the end the objective is just ever more identification, tracking and control of everyone .

It gets even worse when you think of how the improper access could be properly mitigated...

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago

Anyone with a few braincells working knows that it is all bullshit this crusade against porn “for the kids” .

Normies think "for the kids" is a 100% reasonable excuse to restrict freedoms and install authoritarian policy. That's why it works.

I know it's bullshit, you know it's bullshit. Go convince someone who doesn't understand that it is bullshit.

[–] gravitywell@sh.itjust.works 65 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Its not "well intentioned”, the silpery slope is the point. Getting porn sites to essentially self censor by restricting what geographic regions have accesss until one day its the majority of places and suddenly banning porn sites in the remaining hold outs doesnt seem like such a hard sell, and then on to other subjects they dont like.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 44 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It's always referred to as age verification, but it's ID verification. It's the introduction of a regime where you can't use the internet without everyone knowing exactly who you are, and without the government being able to track your activity via your ID. Governments around the world are making what must surely be a coordinated effort to end anonymity, and thus privacy, online. In other countries this has gone along with a push to end encryption for phone calls and chat, and a push to outlaw VPNs. Canada's government is embarking on a program that's very hostile to its own population.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago

Looks like it's time for a more self hosted and distributed web.

[–] NotSteve_@piefed.ca 45 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

I was never excited for Carney (and the Liberals' continuation of power), but I really didn't think they'd anger me as much as they have been*. Yes, I'm happy we don't have PP in power, but at times it's feeling like we may as well have reached the same outcome minus the culture war shit.

I really hope the NDP makes a strong comeback**

Edit (corrections):

*Apparently it was not a bill put forward by Liberal MPs

**The NDP actually supported the first bill of this kind so they're not much help in this situation

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 hours ago

I was never excited for Carney

Politicians gonna politician. They will all will be in favour of this kind of citizen tracking because it makes enforcing policy easier, doesn't matter if it is Liberal, Conservative, or NDP.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not one to glaze Carney, but for the benefit of factuality - this bill was proposed by a senator, not a Liberal MP under Carney. We'll see whether it goes further.

[–] NotSteve_@piefed.ca 14 points 1 day ago

Thank you for the correction, I'll update my comment

[–] morbidcactus@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Afaik this is a senate bill and similar to s210 from last parliament, the NDP voted in favour of that one last session which I'm extremely disappointed about, I recall the NDP being pro privacy in the past, which totally got some of my friends interested in them in the first place.

It's even more disappointing that the liberals were the only party with Nay votes on that one. I realise that wasn't passing this bill but still, unimpressed.

Edit. This showed up earlier too in s203 back a few parliaments ago. Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne is the sponsor on all of these.

[–] NotSteve_@piefed.ca 8 points 1 day ago

Ah, you're correct (sadly). Now that you mention it I remember the NDP voting in favour for that which is depressing to say the least

[–] cecilkorik@piefed.ca 33 points 1 day ago (5 children)

The dark web became known as the hideout of internet criminals. Once we're all internet criminals, it will just be the hideout of everyone. Time to drop all these commercial services that we've let take over the internet and go back to being anonymous weirdos talking to other anonymous weirdos on websites run by anonymous weirdos. The web was ironically a nicer place. Also a shittier place, but at the same time a nicer place. This is why we can't have nice things.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] observantTrapezium@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 day ago

It may be well-intentioned

It may, but it is not.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Nooooo, I thought Canada was very far from this bull shit

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago

Why? We are, and have always been, an economic appendage to the USA.

[–] NotSteve_@piefed.ca 10 points 1 day ago

So did I 🥲

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

Call or write to your MP. Let them know that no one wants this.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Stop that garbage bill that will expose your data to criminals in data breaches.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Criminals? What about politicians, advertisers and law enforcement?

[–] grey_maniac@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 hours ago
[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 hours ago

Yeah, criminals.

[–] aceshigh@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How about instead we ban propaganda and bots?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

If it happens I'll bulk buy flash drives, fill em with useful tools to get around all this... Then just hand them out for free on the street corner next to a highschool.

Fuck age verification, may the people who push it die from a horrible rare cancer.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 4 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (2 children)

Not to be that guy, but teaching high school students to just plug a random flash drive into their PC probably isn't the best security practice to be imparting...

Maybe a booth teaching them?

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 hours ago

Other than USB killers a flash drives are no more dangerous than a CD. No OS autoruns any more and you can always inspect a file before opening it. Better to teach kids to think before they open any file from a source they don't trust rather than to just avoid one type of media.

[–] modus@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe a booth teaching them?

Hey, kids! Come in my booth and I'll show you how to access porn!

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Well... lol. You could make it hey kids learn how to access things in other countries that needs a VPN, and maybe they'd be smart enough to connect the dots, but ya that's no longer as effective heh.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

People already, incorrectly, assume that VPN == Safety thanks to a ridiculous volume of advertising, no need to make that worse.

A VPN only hides your traffic from the people running the equipment between you and the VPN. If your VPN provider is evil, or just lazy, it's the same as not using one at all.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

In this context it's just about bypassing restrictions like age checks.

[–] definitemaybe@lemmy.ca 3 points 19 hours ago

You won't need to. Students find ways around content blocks and share it out themselves. Super sketchy free VPNs in mass use, tethering to phones, using ISP-based free wifi access points piggybacking on home connections from neighbours to the school—or, in one case, the school itself, logging in with guest accounts/incognito mode, running random executables from a (frequently virus-infested) Flash drive (aforementioned VPNs, web browser, or P2P web tunnel/Tor), torrenting, DNS swapping, and also old school "sneaker net" sharing contraband files directly. I've seen it all. The worse part is that they, largely, don't know enough about computers to understand what they're doing, so they end up sharing viruses and spyware with each other. Hell, I've told students to stop using their sketchy janky tools and taught them how to find safe/reputable ones (like ProtonVPN) or just use a different DNS to bypass the school filter entirely. They're doing it anyway; at least teach them how to use a condom.

Kids will find a way past the blocks and share it out. Not to access porn—that'll just be a byproduct—they'll do it to chat with friends and play games.

This is a fool's errand. A massive money pit that will inevitably lead to a massive data breach and resulting scandal. And it won't prevent a single teenager from watching porn.

It's ridiculous that this is still being talked about in 2025, let alone being implemented by clueless Boomer politicians around the world. Ask any computers teacher in Canada if their school has ever successfully blocked students from playing games on school computers—even without web access, lol. It doesn't even take a computer expert to know this will never work.

What a pointless waste.

[–] gwl@piefed.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 day ago

That's always been the point.

[–] FlyingSpaceCow@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The only way this would be acceptable is if they built a trustless authenticator. Until then they can fuck the hell off.

[–] ImmersiveMatthew@sh.itjust.works 4 points 23 hours ago

The tech exists and has for decades and is battle hardened. It is called zero proof knowledge but Centralized power wants nothing to do with it as it is a decentralized technology. It is ok, as we will be forced to move towards decentralized services the more we wade into the new AI/Quantum Age as anything Centralized is a sitting duck for being hacked and hacked often to the point that they become useless.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 18 hours ago

its not by accident that all the porn verification are happening in multiple countries all at the same time.

load more comments
view more: next ›