this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
204 points (99.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

44911 readers
648 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

To be clear, I'm not advocating for online age verification. I'm very much against it in any form. I'm just curious from a technical standpoint if it's possible somehow to construct an accurate age verification system that doesn't compromise a user's privacy? i.e., it doesn't expose the person's identity to anyone nor leaves behind a paper trail that can be traced to that person?

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

It is doable, i think. Consider:

You go to your local library. They verify you're above the age limit (like they do at supermarkets when you try to buy alcohol: either look you in the face and recognize you're clearly old enough, or have to show them some kind of id, details vary.)

You pick a code (put your hand in a box and draw a piece of paper at random). Nobody knows what code you picked except you. If lots of people do this at the same time, it's impossible to accurately map codes to people's identity.

You scan the code (like QR code) with your social media app that you use, and it associates the code with your account. Now everybody knows you have a valid code associated to your account, but nobody knows your identity.

(The code could work something like a cryptographic signature, where you can show that you have a valid code without actually revealing the code, so others can't simply copy it. That's a technical detail that you need to leave to the programmers to accurately understand.)

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That sounds logical, but I think there would be an immediate black market for valid codes that would be sold to minors.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

same for alcohol

[–] QuinnyCoded@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago

I'd say it's impossible. Minors will ALWAYS find a way around it, even if it involves government IDs. The actual trick is finding if a "are you 18?" box is enough or not.

[–] rowinxavier@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There are tonnes of ways but honestly, the easiest way is to do it at the ISP level. Have an internet connection you don't want used for adult material? Have an opt in service at the ISP to block XXX rated sites and maybe social media. If you are old enough to pay for your own internet you should not be required to jump through hoops to access what you want, but kids should not be thrown onto the internet without guardrails. Some kids will get around it but it would be an active choice, so most kids would not. And to be clear, this would be done at the ISP level where you already have verification of age built in to billing, so no additional privacy concern. Honestly, the fact that this is not the solution is what tells me all of this filtering is not about protecting kids, it is about centralisation and control along with pork barrelling for age verification companies.

[–] sleen@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The kids are just bait for the masses, the big bad wolf doesn't care about the safety. Control is what they're after.

Besides that the point about guardrails, is what I agree in. It would prove beneficial for kids until they become fully aware teenagers. It is also beneficial to note the lack of distinction between teens and kids within these laws. This is what truly makes this predatory - where the fully aware individuals are stripped off their rights.

If they are going to take away the rights of our children, teens & adolescents, what is stopping them from taking away our rights?

[–] rowinxavier@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, there is a massive difference between a 9 year old and a 14 year old. Someone who is 17 is not necessarily significantly different from an 18 year old, yet we have to draw the line somewhere. I think if you own and pay for the service it should be up to you at a service level, not up to the government to demand a random third party company be accessed to verify ID and so on. That third party company stands to make money while also being a wonderful target for hackers.

[–] sleen@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 weeks ago

That brings us to the whole concept of the internet. Decentralisation. Everyone at this point is impacted; and while age is being used as a weapon, the internet is becoming more and more centralised.

Amazon and cloudflare outages were warnings before the real storm. Decentralisation is where we should strive for - and yet the only thing this proves, is the naiveness and the lack of understanding the people that make these laws have.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We could go by width of feet... You take a foot picture, it goes to another user temporarily while they sign in. If they think that's an adult then you're in. Then they take a foot photo and the next random user sees their image and they have to judge if the image is an adult. But the image could also be a fake. If they identify a false positive they have to wait 5 minutes. And so on. If others need to login they could judge the same image already identified as adult. If they think its not an adult then that user's logins is set to wait 5 minutes while two other users are snown the image. If those two users think its an adult then the user who said it was not an adult get to wait for 15 minutes. If however those two guys agree with it not being adult then that user gets permanently banned.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 2 points 3 weeks ago

The users confirm others at random.

[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

There are no registration or registry with individuals' information if guardians use parental controls and adult sites and apps identify themselves as adult for those controls, check what their kids are doing online, and talk with them about dangerous people or content they might see to teach them how to stay safe.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›