this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
367 points (97.7% liked)
Technology
82460 readers
2674 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The CA law does push for open standards.
Specifically a standard way for app stores to get the age range of users, the alternatives are:
Realistically I think talking about RSS readers as a way to stop kids getting hooked on loot boxes is burying your head in the sand though.
It's an open standard that could lead to tighter controls on devices in the future. That's an extremely slippery slope. Wouldn't it make more sense to require age verification for social media platforms and outlaw online gambling? Why deanonymize the devices themselves? I suspect it has nothing to do with protecting children.
If I had to speculate, I think the people in power are scared of how much on-device AI could empower the masses and they're laying the groundwork to curtail it right now.
You could say that about anything? Are you opposed to oauth/openid because it could lead to tighter controls in the future?
Have you read the law? It doesn't deanonymize anything.
You say that like requiring Reddit to do actual age verification is better than your OS asking you to enter your age on your account.
I think we should ban online gambling, but that's also an actual ban instead of the open standards that YOU were asking for.
If the social media platforms are the problem, then why control the devices and not the social media platforms? Makes no sense unless there's an ulterior motive.
What control do you think this law puts on devices?
It's not this law, it's the precedent and how it'll be used sd leverage later to push super invasive and manipulative shit.
So a law that is deliberately done in the least invasive way, sets a president to push invasive and manipulative shit?
Can you explain how? Like in any way? When it's clearly going to reduce the manipulation of kids.
Know what? I'll bite. Let's have a civil discussion how this is either actually beneficial to 'save the kids' or, on the other hand, this is just the first step of a process designed to force full surveillance at the OS level, now that people are finally starting to care a bit about their privacy.
If it is to do something to keep the kids away from harm (you mentioned to reduce manipulation of kids) how does spinning 3 wheels with numbers, attached to no verification whatsoever, help? This is that useless 'Are you over 18?' pop-up all over again, where you just click 'yes' and move on with whatever it is you wanted to get away with. So, on that front, unless this is designed to put undue extra responsibility and work on the OS developers, this makes no sense (of course, I'm more than willing to hear you counter this theory).
Now, if it's just that first step, the politicians trying to see what else they can get away with pushing on the population, one step at a time, next they will add 'the OS will require a picture of the user holding an ID to confirm the entered date of birth, but it will remain local, the OS will just reply yes or no to the apps requesting the info'. Then it'll be 'will be sent to a government database for safeguarding', and so on until you no longer can get away from not showing your face and ID to everyone out there.
Anyway, which one makes more sense to you, honestly?
Slippery nipples for everyone!
It's crazy that the reddit/Lemmy hivemind opposes the most mild regulations on predatory app stores and the argument is well this law is fine but it COULD slippery nipples our way to a much worse law that is completely different in its form and intent than this law.
I guess you can take the corporate surveillance out of reddit, but you can't take the libertarian instincts out of the redditors.