@protonprivacy@mastodon.social
2026-04-23 19:27 UTC
Replies (22)
-
@Kierkegaanks@beige.party 2026-04-23 20:05
@protonprivacy no it doesn’t sound reasonable at first take either. It’s upfront insane
-
@bennypl@defcon.social 2026-04-23 20:08
@protonprivacy really, so you want facial scans....
-
@juangames@mastodon.social 2026-04-23 20:16
@protonprivacy Exactly, I don't really mind when a bar asks for your ID to make sure you're over 18 because they see only the birth date once and that's it. What scares me is that digitally one's id will most likely be stored with all the data in it.
-
@miaholte@snabelen.no 2026-04-23 20:24
@protonprivacy Its not reasonable at all. Put age restrictions on the hardware instead of the software. Ban smart phones for the youngest kids.
-
@ohmrun@indieweb.social 2026-04-23 20:38
@protonprivacy I don't think you're in danger of being taken too seriously after the shenanigans last year.
-
@ph00lt0@mastodon.social 2026-04-23 20:38
@protonprivacy terrible. No. No. No. The solution is much more simple: build in better patental control into operating systems. Allow parrents to better guard/configure devices or their minors such as setting the age and what kinds of content their kid may consume. There is absolutely no need for any ID, or facial scan by untustworthy parties and software.
-
@ZoidbergForPresident@kolektiva.social 2026-04-23 21:00
@protonprivacy Aren't you the company that gave a fascist regime free user data because they just asked?
-
@notthatkindofdoctor@mastodon.social 2026-04-23 21:08
@protonprivacy Age verification is stupid. Nothing online has ever harmed me the way real life humans did when I was a child.
-
@cjustind@mamot.fr 2026-04-23 21:11
@protonprivacy how that, relying on facial scans would be better? This is so obviously yet another wrong path to take.
-
@gcvsa@mstdn.plus 2026-04-23 21:46
@protonprivacy This would be a whole lot more believeable if Proton's CEO wasn't a publicly-known Trump supporter by his own announcement.
-
@xs4me2@mastodon.social 2026-04-23 22:24
@protonprivacy Simply unacceptable and another step into a big Brother total control scenario. What could possibly go wrong…
-
@KingmaYpe@mastodon.green 2026-04-23 22:30
@protonprivacy The question is: can you trust your government tot anonimize your age?
-
@Orca@nya.one 2026-04-23 22:32
@protonprivacy@mastodon.social Proton thinks mandatory ID requirement is bad and Proton thinks mandatory facial scans is the solution to age verification. Piss off.
-
@wpeckham@social.linux.pizza 2026-04-23 23:13
@protonprivacy the both parts bother me. The first is for those laws that require you to submit an ID and probably a government ID that identifies you absolutely and that goes into a database. How many databases with IP information have not been broken into in the last decade? That's a much smaller number than the number of ones that have not been broken into. But then the second part is when you use a computer anytime you connect to something or get a service from something, it gets to say, hey, are you a juvenile and it gets an answer. So the predators know exactly where the next victim is. Sure, the honest services can protect those potential victims. But how good a job have they done of that already? If that was a priority, and if any of them, even one, was really good at that job of protecting the potential victims, we wouldn't be considering these laws to begin with. This is a plan that's likely to generate a feeding frenzy!
-
@haljor@sfba.social 2026-04-23 23:22
@protonprivacy Holy shiitake!
-
@yenndc@kolektiva.social 2026-04-23 23:37
@protonprivacy > The scope of places where age verification is required must be strictly confined to areas like pornography and social media. While trans people, gay men, sexual health information, black women and sport bras are being defined as pornographic… I hope it's just extreme naivety.
-
@drewtowler@mas.to 2026-04-23 23:47
@protonprivacy "Given all the online threats out there, the desire to “do something” to protect kids is understandable, even laudable." And that's what parents are for. Everything else is FUD created by Meta for their own ends.
-
@Lep0le@piaille.fr 2026-04-24 07:31
@protonprivacy it's time to develop other type of communication on mesh radio networks for example or so ...
-
@aspragg@ohai.social 2026-04-24 16:29
@protonprivacy > Checks must be conducted entirely client-side, on the user’s device. […] And the code that underpins the system must be open-source, allowing the public to be certain that these expectations are being met. So, the checks must be on the client, with open source code that the user can inspect… and modify… on their client? I thoroughly approve (also related, right2repair) - I'm just not convinced you'll be able to sneak it past even the most techno-ignorant of legislators!
-
@TCatInReality@mastodon.social 2026-04-25 10:27
@protonprivacy What an absurd, hysterical take. Age verification only impacts access to age gated content. You can still access search engines, news sites, your banking and other apps, etc. Most of the online world is not age gated. Of course, we need proper data privacy regulation about any data collection, including age verification. That's the real fight, not scaremongering that allows adult content to run riot.
-
@Boosh22@mastodon.social 2026-04-28 22:25
@protonprivacy agree, it's a step in the wrong direction.
-
@FourQ@mastodon.online 2026-05-01 22:13
@protonprivacy It's a step way too far. They'd control all data for everyone. Everything is online, your family, friends, employer, bank, house, shopping, doctors, the lot, and it's only getting worse. Everything has an app, whether it's needed or not & you're simply expected in 2026 to be online. But they could cut you off for any reason. Lock you out of everything. You'd be more at their mercy than you are now. All because they have your ID linked up. It's alarming that's not too far fetched.