LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks<69%Originally Posted by spacein_vader
<69%
The money wasted will have been by the companies implementing age-checking systems. The reason it's delayed? Political, nobody wants something controversial happening when there is a leadership change, which will likely trigger an early general election.
I don't have any particular reason to think the age verifier platforms are inherently evil, or are in-bed with the government for harvesting porn habits. At the end of the day, the tech looks like a simple token based authentication system - a porn site hands you off to their age verifier, who you logon with, and that passes you back to the porn site. The authenticator knows which porn site you visited, but not much more than that. The porn site knows nothing about you, apart from you passed an external authentication check.
Sounds all great. But when the big porn sites owns the big authenticator (MindGeek) there is the opportunity to correlate some data. Then there is also the risk of hackers doing the same, and the risk of law enforcement requiring information.
Yoti is also subject to the same risks - it's not about whether they're privately owned, use good encryption, run by the church, whatever, it's about the fact that they have that information and what else it could be used by.
Remember that data protection laws grew out of WW2 where registers of people in invaded countries were used to round up people the Nazis didn't like. It's not the original use of the data, but it's what can be done with that data by a malicious actor. The Nazi party invading doesn't seem like an immediate threat at the moment, but a data breach is something we hear about all the time. LinkedIn and Adobe are two large technology companies that come to mind who lost their customer data.
I think the data issue comes back to something I've been harping on about for years .... unless there's a good reason for me, I see the only way to minimise the risk of my data being abused, or even just lost, is to be very careful who I let get hold of any of it.
It's impossible, short of unrealistic extreme measures, to keep absolute privacy but it certainly is possible to minimise how much is known, and who knows it.
The only question is whether we each, as individuals, care enough or even care at all, to go to the trouble of doing the minimising. I do, but that's a personal decision.
You see why they all get senior management positions when they leave politics right?
No real grasp of the problem or it's solutions - tick.
Certain some "technical wizard" will solve it all for them - tick.
Definitely going to take the credit but not the blame - big f'ing tick!
Born for it!
While entirely taking your point, I do think child porn isn't a good comparison.
Firstly (and obviously) they're not trying to bl8ck porn, but to age-restrict access. The 'blocking' bit is really a stick to beat porn sites with if they don't implement acceptable age-verification. The most obvious way to do that is by credit-card identification as you need to be (IIRC) 18+ to get one (* note) but the obvioys problem, I'd guess, is that a high percentage of pornsite users don't want that on their card history.
And if you remove subscription chsrges, the other major revenue stream for pirn siites will be ad-generated rdferrals etc, and targetting those is going to be hit if usrrs access vua a VPN, especially anonymised, and could therefore be anyone, from anywhere.
I woulx suspect the "blocking" thing isn't actually intended to bl8ck the sites ax such, but to disrupt their marketing and business plans.
Also, as I understand it, child moves about. It's FAR less overt, and rather more underground, with access to serious sites communicated by word of mouth among insiders. Or at least. that's what an FBI agent said on a documentary, a couple of years ago. So .... a site gets discoved it vanishes and re-appears somewhere else, with private chat redirecting core users that are (or should be) aware that what theyre doing is highly illegal.
"Legit" porn sites can't do that .. or not without loads of members/users lising track of them.
The methods, therefore, used to deter non-AV sites and those used to try to catch child pirn users will be very different.
It's a bit like trading standards checking that off-licences aren's selling beer or cider to kids, compared with intensive police action against drug dealers and importers.
* Note = I serm to remember there's nothing technically stopping card issuers giving cards to under-18's but under 18's cannot enter into a legally enforceable debt, so the card could incur unrecoverable debt if the "child" defaulted. Unless an adult is on the contract as a guarantor. But it's sufficiently a minefield that card companies don't want to know.
I take your point, but off-licences selling booze to U18s is hardly 100% adhered to either. Either way it won't work.
Indeed. But adherence to that law, and indeed most laws, is largely a consequence of the level of pain from punishment if caught, and the perceived likelihood of getting caught.
Any analogy tends only to work up to a point, and in the case of off-licences, the reward to the licensee isn't huge but that tells you the minimum expectation of getting caught.
I strongly suspect tbat child porn users have another factor too .... a driving compulsion. It's very much getting off the point, but I wonder if they have any more choice than gays do about being gay, heteros do about being hetero, etc.
And before anyone gets upset if I've used politically incorrect terminology, it's because I have no idea what the politically correct terminology is this week/year. I'm not trying to offend anybody.
Last edited by Saracen999; 26-06-2019 at 01:14 PM. Reason: Tpyo
aidanjt (26-06-2019)
It changes on an hourly basis these days, keep your eyes glued to twitter or perish!
Me? Twitter? Am I supposed to use Akexa to do Google search too?It changes on an hourly basis these days, keep your eyes glued to twitter or perish!
You trying to get me to fuse the forum's swear filter into a single, molten blob? Or give me an aneurysm? Or both?
Might as well expect me to deny Br..... ahhhh, me head.
P.S. Yup, noticed the wink.
aidanjt (26-06-2019)
Oh Ебать, someone hit the Forum AZ-5, quickly...!!!
Might as well get used to that... a 'wink' is all you'll get without a verification ID!P.S. Yup, noticed the wink.
_______________________________________________________________________
aidanjt (26-06-2019)
If anyone's interested in the technical legal detail for the delay:
“In April of last year we laid three instruments before the House for approval. One of those instruments, on guidance for age verification arrangements, set out standards that companies need to comply with.
“This should have been notified to the European Union Commission in line with the technical standards and regulations directive. And it was not.”
Yup, spotted that earlier. Funny, that's not the real technical problem that they're going to face.
What are they going to do, throw us out of Europe?
aidanjt (26-06-2019)
What, like "It don't work", you mean?
Isn't that standard for government IT projects? And mandatory for defense contracts. I mean, heaven forfend that they should actually get value for (our) money.
aidanjt (26-06-2019)
Now that is a strategy I hadn't considered. Dammit, where'd I put Boris' phone number?
And that's the end of that :-
https://news.sky.com/story/governmen...kinks-11837055
Jon
Corky34 (17-10-2019)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote