On AgeGate- two such brilliant minds with so much knowledge and experience yet, chasing shiny toy of supposed care for children while brutal cookout of our privacy is prepared. In my native language we have saying roughly translating to "Blind despite functional eyes".
As Leo experienced first hand with ad buys for TWIT, a hook is expected into the user or no transaction. Internet privacy is affront both to demanding Gvts and to BigTech hungry to track and tabulate you. Both of these powerful giants want such info for control and manipulation, corporate world also for profit. However, Internet as it is provides a lot of avenues for privacy. Hence, those two need new paradigm. Child safety is age old excuse for anything. Real interest is to quickly establish infrastructure on the most fundamental levels, OS and hardware, capable of "securely" (for abuse purpose) identifying anyone connected to the 'net. As when you are boiling frogs, first in a unthreatening manner, voluntary unenforceable age statement. But, the key is to implement that API. Once in, like a camel's nose in the tent, ratcheting will follow - oh, it is so easy to cheat, let's strengthen the requirements... End goal is absolute identification of the user on every device, most likely mandatory combination of Gvt ID and biometrics matching it. Communicated w/o user control to even ISP in order to be allowed any activity and of course, to every grabby entity on the 'net. Hence, opposition even to seemingly small tweaks like UserAge in Systemd on Linux very existence is important. This infrastructure must not be allowed to take root or all of us will pay dearly. Finally, BigTech will not accept rational "for the children" musings discussed in the show, they want everyone labeled, tracked and tabulated, worth billions to them. Apple, MS, Google,... all come to support of this CA (and similar elsewhere) law. Apple, "privacy protector" did not even had any mandate from UK to introduce age check there... they did anyway, for themselves.
As Leo experienced first hand with ad buys for TWIT, a hook is expected into the user or no transaction. Internet privacy is affront both to demanding Gvts and to BigTech hungry to track and tabulate you. Both of these powerful giants want such info for control and manipulation, corporate world also for profit. However, Internet as it is provides a lot of avenues for privacy. Hence, those two need new paradigm. Child safety is age old excuse for anything. Real interest is to quickly establish infrastructure on the most fundamental levels, OS and hardware, capable of "securely" (for abuse purpose) identifying anyone connected to the 'net. As when you are boiling frogs, first in a unthreatening manner, voluntary unenforceable age statement. But, the key is to implement that API. Once in, like a camel's nose in the tent, ratcheting will follow - oh, it is so easy to cheat, let's strengthen the requirements... End goal is absolute identification of the user on every device, most likely mandatory combination of Gvt ID and biometrics matching it. Communicated w/o user control to even ISP in order to be allowed any activity and of course, to every grabby entity on the 'net. Hence, opposition even to seemingly small tweaks like UserAge in Systemd on Linux very existence is important. This infrastructure must not be allowed to take root or all of us will pay dearly. Finally, BigTech will not accept rational "for the children" musings discussed in the show, they want everyone labeled, tracked and tabulated, worth billions to them. Apple, MS, Google,... all come to support of this CA (and similar elsewhere) law. Apple, "privacy protector" did not even had any mandate from UK to introduce age check there... they did anyway, for themselves.
