Roblox is starting to roll out the mandatory age checks that will require all of its users to submit an ID or scan their face in order to access the platform's chat features.
maybe. when china did it with their law about children not using their phones after curfew, they handled it by building a face database of everyone except children, then matching against that.
also a very useful way to mask your true reason if your true reason is “i want to build a database of people”. four horsemen of the internet type shit.
Yes but I don’t think anyone but the ccp is capable of actually doing that competently at the scale of a large country. Maybe ten years ago google might’ve had a shot.
Yeah. I’m not a fan of any if this, but nobody cares when you say ‘dont be evil¹’; not being pointlessly recklessly evil isn’t a serious grown-up policy. better to do a political Tesla valve; introduce competing contradictory evil, dilute the propaganda, and arrest momemtym
you say that, but if that was the case why would ibm go to all that trouble to get an exclusion from the json user agreement clause “the software shall be used for good, not evil”?
And part of what I want is for children to be excluded. To not be tracked. It’s a good wedge that turns their rhetoric against them.
maybe. when china did it with their law about children not using their phones after curfew, they handled it by building a face database of everyone except children, then matching against that.
Still fucking awful, but more work and keeps kids a little safer than the opposite
also a very useful way to mask your true reason if your true reason is “i want to build a database of people”. four horsemen of the internet type shit.
Yes but I don’t think anyone but the ccp is capable of actually doing that competently at the scale of a large country. Maybe ten years ago google might’ve had a shot.
doing it incompetently is arguably worse, because that involves storing way too much info and sharing it too freely.
Yeah. I’m not a fan of any if this, but nobody cares when you say ‘dont be evil¹’; not being pointlessly recklessly evil isn’t a serious grown-up policy. better to do a political Tesla valve; introduce competing contradictory evil, dilute the propaganda, and arrest momemtym
¹except HUAC. HUAC cares.
you say that, but if that was the case why would ibm go to all that trouble to get an exclusion from the json user agreement clause “the software shall be used for good, not evil”?
Yeah they did the 30s/40s equivalent, but I don’t think they still have the functional capacity to work at that scale.