←back to thread

134 points salutis | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.404s | source
Show context
chmod775 ◴[] No.45135811[source]
While I'll immediately believe their complaints about political shenanigans and publicity stunts going on in the EU commission, this post very obviously intentionally ignores good-faith efforts at building out privacy-preserving age verification using ZKP. They're laying into a strawman - with gusto - when they attack age verification methods that are objectively worse than the commission's best proposal.

It's hurting their own case by giving the EU commission the easiest retort imaginable. If you really don't want age verification, that's bad, because they usually get the last word in.

Better to respond in good faith to the commission's strongest possible argument, rather than do this, which is going to get brushed aside while handing them a win.

replies(3): >>45138276 #>>45143588 #>>45149883 #
1. g-b-r ◴[] No.45138276[source]
Privacy-preserving good-faith efforts requiring a Google/Apple account and a phone passing Play Integrity (or an iPhone)
replies(2): >>45146619 #>>45146650 #
2. mindslight ◴[] No.45146619[source]
They might be "good faith" in terms of the relationship between corpos and government, but they most certainly are not good faith in the relationship between corpos and individual software freedom. One can't simply sprinkle ZKP faerie dust and obtain any desired security properties. These systems simply cannot provide the claimed security properties without relying on treacherous computing that prevents individuals from running the software of their choosing on their own devices.
3. botanical76 ◴[] No.45146650[source]
Can you provide more context on this?