this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2026
136 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

6944 readers
35 users here now

News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.

What doesn't fit here?

The core of the story has to be technology focused.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefixCountry prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip


Icon attribution | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The momentum is building for a social media ban for minors in one of the largest economies in the world.

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] warm@kbin.earth 57 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Ignoring the desire for state control a moment.

If they actually cared, they would spend the money on education and social services instead.

The internet is already age-gated, children cannot buy an internet connection.

It is adults who let them access it, unsupervised. Better parental controls and education/advice on how to use them is required for current and future parents.

[–] No_Eponym@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 months ago

Bingo. Why do they need an Internet connected device at all? Give them a dumb phone, and if they use a computer put it in a public area when it is online. Problem solved.

[–] doleo@lemmy.one 11 points 2 months ago

It is impossible for me to believe this has anything to do with protecting minors. None of these measures ever do.

[–] flactwin@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago

they just find another way to make some money covering by children care

[–] BrikoX@lemmy.zip 34 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

China level surveilance is coming to EU. Scary times.

It's identical system to how China ties your identity to your online activity.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Bingo.

It's what all governments have been trying to do for decades.

It's part of why they've been trying to get rid of cash.

[–] linule@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

It’s not? I’ve not checked in depth yet, but it’s supposed to be privacy protecting, via cryptographic proofs. Also, it’s open source.

[–] Flaqueman@sh.itjust.works -4 points 2 months ago

You haven't read the article. It shows

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 30 points 2 months ago

Social media bad for kids but good for adults? Who the fuck are they trying to fool.

I would gladly trade all social media for no age verification.

We have a social media problem, not an age verification one.

[–] terabyterex@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I was starting to switch over all my services to european based ones but thry actually might do this worse. At least in the us congress people will fight about it forever (or at leadt they used to)

[–] artyom@piefed.social 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Its only a matter of time before they get Chat Control as well.

Nowhere is safe anymore.

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] artyom@piefed.social 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] forestbeasts@pawb.social 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not the good kind.

Seriously, "just go outside" ignores that some people (like us) kinda need the internet to have community at all.

(We're furry, therian, and various other things. We can't just pick up a magazine or whatever and get furry porn of the exact kinks we're into. And even besides the whole porn thing. Also just, like... being able to talk to people. We need the internet for that, too.)

-- Frost

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 months ago

Isolating people like us is the point. We have to fight it

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 3 points 2 months ago

Yes, it’s in hedges.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Self hosting is the only real solution apparently, anything else gives power to corporations/governments to abuse.

[–] terabyterex@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Yeah i will use nextcloud but i am hosting it myself

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And it's a lot harder to effectively enforce or combine with other services, such as ID, etc, because 50 states.

Fed can only do so much, and it only takes one state fighting it to cause it to fail or at least become bogged down.

[–] terabyterex@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Right, and i think it might ve unconstitutional but i would like it not to pass at all the wait for it to be repealed

[–] troed@fedia.io 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Since absolutely no one has studied the tech before commenting.

It's:

  • Open source
  • Privacy protecting

Carry on.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Isn’t this the same one that has been found to be about as secure as a wet paper bag within hours of release? You can simply edit a text file in the apps data to remove the pin and face unlock lol

[–] troed@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago

I have no idea why people claim that the open source template meant for others to build solutions on was some sort of finished and published app.

[–] RumorsOfLove@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Zero-knowledge proof means that the app could actually be private. Seriously, this could be used for good.

[–] BrikoX@lemmy.zip 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] ulu_mulu@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I'm EU and we already have digital IDs in most countries, controlled by our governments and mandatory to access government and public administrations websites.

These IDs don't let websites collect more info that they already can without any IDs at all. If you think you're protected form Meta/Google/Microsoft/whatever profiling you, your IP, geo-locating you if you use a phone, just because they don't have your ID, I have a bridge to sell you.

That's not to say this thing is good, age-verification is bad and dangerous, they should educate people instead, both kids and parents. But having governments manage your ID is much less evil than giving it to private companies or baking it into an operating system.

It all comes down on how they implement this app, and the code being opensource is a good thing.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 9 points 2 months ago

Nope! This is cryptographically impossible. See Signals sealed sender. It only works because Signal doesn't keep a map between account and the certs.

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago

No it won't