Post AGlf795ogpDXQbWMSG by rysiek@mastodon.technology
(DIR) More posts by rysiek@mastodon.technology
(DIR) Post #AGlf76sytZlIaDV5Ae by rysiek@mastodon.technology
2022-02-23T11:41:01Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Hey #privacy #DigitalHumanRights #fediverse, what are your thoughts about age verification on-line?The #DigitalServicesAct might ban ads targeting children. Of course, the question is: how to implement it?The advertisers will insist this is "hard"or "impossible". One possible response is to say: well you created this problem, you fix it. If you want targeted ads, figure out how to *not* target kids.But that's effectively leaving this in the hands of #BigTech.
(DIR) Post #AGlf77PExdZACGaqS8 by onan@dobbs.town
2022-02-23T12:08:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@rysiek in the USA, legislation was underway to regulate tobacco product advertising on television. The tobacco industry withdrew all advertising as an attempt to avoid that. The legislation shifted to emphasize “equal time” advertising. Tobacco ads had existed, so to be “fair” the government forces the tobacco industry to run anti-tobacco ads.The comic book industry came up with the Comics Code Authority to avoid being legislated.Not saying either are good, only that they are precedenets.
(DIR) Post #AGlf77zklsm01Vg0Mi by rysiek@mastodon.technology
2022-02-23T11:44:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Another possible solution is to say: here's an EU-run age verification service. A person logs in, and (say, via OIDC claims) a advertisement service provider gets an answer to a simple yes/no question (say, "is this person older than 13").But that requires running a service with access to private information and giving out hints about that private information piecemeal.Any other possible solutions? Any arguments pro/con the "ban targeting ads to children"? Any talking points/suggestions?Thanks!
(DIR) Post #AGlf795ogpDXQbWMSG by rysiek@mastodon.technology
2022-02-23T11:47:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Some context:https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-lawmaker-rule-out-online-ads-target-children/This is not a hypothetical, this is a policy debate tat is happening now and will affect EU and the broader Internet for decades to come -- just like GDPR has.
(DIR) Post #AGmdeMUnsBsVnpsZcW by smallsees@social.dropbear.xyz
2022-02-23T23:26:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@rysiek you have to be careful that it wouldn't leave a breadcrum trail that turns into some of super cookie, especially as it involves adtech.Sure the system itself just uses some UUID and a simple yes/no response but they can then follow that UUID around to build up a persona. This person likes fast cars, Lego and those sort of bands etc.It then only takes one site you can get personal data from to link the UUID to a real person and they're sorted.
(DIR) Post #AGzLxaqdfSaJmYByMq by sean@social.deadsuperhero.com
2022-03-02T02:39:45.365396Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@rysiek On the one hand, ID verification makes sense for things like investment platforms and online bank accounts. The process is generally easy enough that you upload a photo of your ID, and the server takes some time to validate that the information is correct. That part is not too difficult.On the other hand, I can’t help but feel weird about social platforms making it a requirement that their users do this. It feels kind of gross, in the sense that identity verification could entangle PII with somebody’s social account, depending on how it’s implemented. Also, it kind of puts up a big roadblock towards anyone who would prefer to use the social web under a pseudonym, since their identity is verified against something like an ID and probably stored.One idea this might be for advertisers to run some kind of opt-in service where people get paid a little bit of money for every ad that they see, and the sites that the ads show up on also get paid a split for every ad, for letting the ad show on their site. If that service were to require age verification for end users, none of their ads could feasibly target children.This is all hypothetical, I have no deep understanding of how any of this would work.
(DIR) Post #AGzOVeQb40k4dhNYMC by Azure@tailswish.industries
2022-03-02T03:07:59.167371Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@rysiek I think it's a terrible idea.The Child Online Privacy Protection Act has been a disaster. Perhaps I'm biased due to growing up in a right-wing, religious home and being able to have institutions like public libraries where I could read and learn whatever I wanted without someone looking over my shoulder, but COPPA has lead to children second-class citizens online more than they were before. With their accounts forced into surveillance straitjackets attached to some authority figure.Further, it makes adults worse off. Open APIs and compatibility seem to disappear when age verification rolls in. You can look at the way Youtube videos suddenly become inaccessible to yt-dlp, newpipe, or whatever as soon as they get marked as 'sensitive'.And, of course, the marking as 'sensitive' gets done with the same algorithmic sloppiness as everything else. So we end up with string quartets and reviews of Peter Watkins documentaries disappearing for any user not logged in.it also cuts a lot of adults out of the loop. Especially if they go the lazy route and make you show possession of a credit card or, in the United States, a driver's license.I think any approach to law that creates a set of content restrictions /for children/ is bad for children. In the case of ads, I'd be happy to simply /ban the entire class of ads/ that we think children ought not be exposed to.I don't know that it would really improve the world, but it would at least do less to make the world worse.
(DIR) Post #AH01eWdDJh6BHGVEwK by galaxis@mastodon.infra.de
2022-02-23T12:44:59Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@rysiek That problem is indeed hard to solve while at least retaining a minimum of pseudonymity in online activities.Advertisers probably would have to assume everyone is a child (same as they have to assume everyone has not consented to tracking), and change ad profiles only for users with a known identity.In traditional broadcast media, there's a time restriction (like certain ads on TV are allowed only past 2200h), but then you'd at least have to sort people into timezone buckets.
(DIR) Post #AH01qwslXh3kAThX5E by josias@floss.social
2022-02-23T21:07:35Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@rysiek Age verification online is overall a terrible idea. It's easy to lie about your age in a prompt for your age, and anything more intrusive will be much *worse* for the privacy of everyone on the Internet (such as the hypothetical age-verification service you describe).Stopping targeted ads as a whole is the best way forward. We don't want anyone collecting *more* information for the sake of "protecting privacy".
(DIR) Post #AH022jshhoMDJyIIyW by rysiek@mastodon.technology
2022-02-23T21:58:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@derwinmcgeary yeah, but if people have to opt-in to see ads, then...yeah, I like this.
(DIR) Post #AH022kMptmSapQOMwS by RefurioAnachro@toot.cat
2022-02-23T22:12:31Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
Or the other way around: so, you don't want to see ads? Then prove that you are under 13...I'll find out by myself, thanks.@rysiek @derwinmcgeary
(DIR) Post #AH022l1FTWmoqlIdvs by rysiek@mastodon.technology
2022-02-23T21:58:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@derwinmcgeary joking aside, Big Tech has also been claiming that targeted ads are so good for customers and that customers *want* targeted ads.So that would be another "I call bull on this" moment.
(DIR) Post #AH02MVtTQ9RNjO5EO0 by nat@ferrus.net
2022-03-02T03:08:09Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@rysiek The risks of forcing people to verify their ID for any service are much worse than the risk of kids being convinced they want Spiderman branded Pop Tarts.