• notSys@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Stop Killing Drinking: No ID & No Age Verification for buying beer.

    We (as a society) recognize narcotics, such as alcohol, as bad, so we ban the children from taking them. We don’t burden the parents, because we recognize that there’re parents who won’t care.

    Predatory online platforms are the same. If you don’t want to verify your identity, don’t use them.

    If you are forced to be verified (but age verification is not the same as age declaration) without using those services, then it’s a valid compliant.

  • stravanasu@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    This initiative is just a smokescreen; it actually pushes things down the slippery slope.

    Citizens must not be forced to identify themselves to access lawful online content or services unless strictly necessary, proportionate and provided by law. The legislation should require anonymous or pseudonymous proof-of-age, data minimisation, selective disclosure

    Define “necessary”. Define “by law”. The pushers for proof-of-age already say it’s anonymous – but it can’t be.

  • qwerty@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    We call on the European Commission to propose legislation ensuring that digital identity and age-assurance systems used to access online services in the Union remain voluntary, privacy-preserving and non-discriminatory. Citizens must not be forced to identify themselves to access lawful online content or services unless strictly necessary, proportionate and provided by law. The legislation should require anonymous or pseudonymous proof-of-age, data minimisation, selective disclosure, open-source implementation, independent security audits, prohibition of cross-service tracking by relying parties, and equivalent alternatives for citizens who do not use a digital wallet.

    Yeah, nah.

    • Lama Thématique@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Yeah, I read the language on their website and they seemed to be holding a much stricter line. Here the line seems more blurry where :

      • in that same paragraph they say “remain voluntary” and “should require”
      • “unless strictly necessary” is undefined. Is it all adult contents or banks, insurance and administrative procedure (which already often require IDs) that count as necessary ?
      • Do they have solutions for that “privacy preserving” proof of age ?

      I am not part the campaign so I’m only trying to guess.

      Edit: I have mailed up the Representative of the ECI, I will send an update if i receive a response.