←back to thread

EFF launches Age Verification Hub

(www.eff.org)
347 points iamnothere | 4 comments | 10 Dec 25 20:35 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source

Also: We built a resource hub to fight back against age verification https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/12/age-verification-comin...
Show context
pksebben ◴[11 Dec 25 20:45 UTC] No.46236900[source]▶
This keeps coming up and we keep having the same debates about what Age Verification isn't.

For the folks in the back row:

Age Verification isn't about Kids or Censorship, It's about Surveillance

Age Verification isn't about Kids or Censorship, It's about Surveillance

Age Verification isn't about Kids or Censorship, It's about Surveillance

Without even reaching for my tinfoil hat, the strategy at work here is clear [0 1 2]. If we have to know that you're not a minor, then we also have to know who you are so we can make any techniques to obfuscate that illegal. By turning this from "keep an eye on your kids" to "prove you're not a kid" they've created the conditions to make privacy itself illegal.

VPNs are next. Then PGP. Then anything else that makes it hard for them to know who you are, what you say, and who you say it to.

Please, please don't fall into the trap and start discussing whether or not this is going to be effective to protect kids. It isn't, and that isn't the point.

0 https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/lawmakers-want-ban-vpn...

1 https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/vpn-usage...

2 https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2025-09-15/debates/57714...

replies(14): >>46236954 #>>46237349 #>>46237480 #>>46238016 #>>46238148 #>>46238925 #>>46240138 #>>46240141 #>>46240546 #>>46240662 #>>46240975 #>>46241941 #>>46242412 #>>46243136 #
thinkingtoilet ◴[11 Dec 25 20:49 UTC] No.46236954[source]▶
I am someone who is very privacy focused. I've literally never had a social media account on any platform and I'm 42. From day one of facebook, I never wanted my information online. Like many here, I'm deeply concerned about privacy and surveillance.

In real life, we think age verification is a good thing. Kids shouldn't buy porn. Teenagers shouldn't get into bars. etc... There has to be room somewhere for reasonable discussion about making sure children do not have access to things they shouldn't. I think it's important to note, that complete dismissal of this idea only turns away your allies and hurts our cause in the long run.

replies(7): >>46237065 #>>46237254 #>>46237430 #>>46237509 #>>46237511 #>>46238172 #>>46238205 #
techdmn ◴[11 Dec 25 22:30 UTC] No.46238205[source]▶
Hate to break it to you, you're on social media right now.
replies(1): >>46238406 #
1. chriswarbo ◴[11 Dec 25 22:47 UTC] No.46238406[source]▶
If HN is social media, then so are PHPBB, NNTP, BBS, etc. and the term loses its semantic relevance.

My heuristic is that social media focuses on particular people, regardless of what they're talking about. In contrast, forums (like HN) focus on a particular topic, regardless of who's talking about it.

replies(1): >>46238503 #
2. jolmg ◴[11 Dec 25 22:57 UTC] No.46238503[source]▶
Doesn't matter what you want it to mean. What matters is what those in power want it to mean. It's very easy to stretch the definition to cover all sites where people can post content for strangers to see, or stretch it even wider to all digital media where people can interact with a social group.
replies(1): >>46238569 #
3. chriswarbo ◴[11 Dec 25 23:03 UTC] No.46238569[source]▶
> Doesn't matter what you want it to mean. What matters is what those in power want it to mean.

I was replying to a discussion between two HN users, who were using conflicting definitions of the term. AFAIK they are not "those in power".

replies(1): >>46238671 #
4. jolmg ◴[11 Dec 25 23:13 UTC] No.46238671{3}[source]▶
> AFAIK they are not "those in power".

AFAIK nobody here is. The point is that with relevance to the current discussion on potential future age-verification laws, only the widest definition matters, because that's what's at risk.