Porn age checks - Surely a good thing?

[Vimtolady]

Just read a ‘debate’ on the BBC News website about the pros and cons of age verification of porn websites. Weirdly I was verified for the first time myself last night (I am a porn user but not all the time) so was interested to read it.

j get that it was a debate but I honestly don’t see how anyone could object. Last night I wasn’t expecting to be verified but the process was simple, took about a minute and I don’t think I’d have easily been able to circumvent it. Obviously there are security concerns but no more so than with any other website.

I think these checks are great! My eldest DC is 13 so probably getting to (or at) the age when porn might become interesting to her, and this would make it much more difficult to access which would doubtless be a good thing, no?

Does anyone disagree?! I’d be interested to hear arguments against because I can’t really think of any and that makes me suspicious I’m being narrow minded.

They are literally asking you to link your personal data and face to the websites you visit

Yes it is

And before lots of non porn, very legit, not adult websites. That's the point

Right so it's more like traffic cameras taking a photo of your car while you're driving it.

That's up to the website owner to assess if their site has material unsuitable for children. The OSA doesn't say put an age gate on every site. MN hasn't got one for example.

Self harm support sites are asking for ID now... it is not just people over 18 who self harm.

Nope

Choosing to ignore all the sites which are legitimate but are behind age barriers now then?

Exactly

They've gone for "better to be safe than sorry"

Making it harder for teens to find the legit help they might need but not want to tell their parents about

I had to age verify on YouTube to watch a music video with the word fuck in this week. I use a vpn too.

Yes if they have your licence plate on camera they can get your name and address from the DVLA. Which is even more of an identity reveal than just uploading a selfie video.

Do you have any examples of a site that has an age barrier but doesn't need to? If so you should contact the owner and let them know they've misunderstood the OSA.

This is so disingenuous.

"If you don't comply with our nebulous and nonspecific rules as kinda laid out in our exceptionally poorly-drafted legislation, then we will slap you with penalties of £18million or imprison you for 51 weeks."

"Oh it's nothing to do with us if some websites misunderstood the Online Safety Law and over-applied it...."

Where does the OSA say that?

You mean you haven't read it? Follow the headings.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/contents

Clue because I am kind: check the schedules. Near the end.

Well-intentioned but potentially disastrous. The risk of identity theft and other huge privacy breaches seem extremely high - and the chances of it preventing a child that wants to, from accessing porn, seem very low.

Of course I support its aims but I'd be very unsurprised if this proves to be the worst piece of legislation of the century.

It was just showing my face! No name/ address / real age given . It was literally some face scanner and my husband could have done it for me if I wanted to

You're missing the point. Never before has it been possible to identify a specific individual from an IP address, meaning that server activity logs don't identify the actual person browsing the site. Now they can. If you happened to look at or post something illegal while you were on there, whether accidentally or deliberately, you can be prosecuted.

If your husband had done it for you, he would be prosecuted.

Not if you use a dynamic IP, and even then IP addresses are still not as accurate as you might think. I work in content moderation (obviously not Reddit) but sensible topics come up.

also it ask you to identify once only. So if say you verified in a coffee shop while in a trip and the you get home and use it again, Reddit would be nonthewiser.

Not if you use a dynamic IP, and even then IP addresses are still not as accurate as you might think. I work in content moderation (obviously not Reddit) but sensible topics come up.

also it ask you to identify once only. So if say you verified in a coffee shop while in a trip and the you get home and use it again, Reddit would be nonthewiser.

Not if you use a dynamic IP, and even then IP addresses are still not as accurate as you might think. I work in content moderation (obviously not Reddit) but sensible topics come up.

also it ask you to identify once only. So if say you verified in a coffee shop while in a trip and the you get home and use it again, Reddit would be none the wiser.

Thanks for such a clear and insightful post.

But it's not linking you to every single website you visit, which includes perfectly legal, but sometimes socially unacceptable things

The speed camera catches you breaking the law

The age checker monitors you doing perfectly legal activities

Your face is the most uniquely identified part of you!

It's easy to track back via someone's photo to find their social media and then a list of people to threaten to "release" data to

There are plenty of people on this thread pointing out sites that have age verification but don't necessarily need it

The owners are being cautious because the penalties are so high they don't want to risk what could be a crippling fine

You like vaguely similar comparisons so it's like shops/pubs don't have to ID for non-alcoholic drinks with less than 0.1% alcohol. Most of them will do because it's better to be extra cautious. You could try and argue they don't NEED to legally but it won't get you anywhere, they won't change their policies because they are protecting themselves just in case

There's no point though because you have clearly fell so hard for the "but it protects the children" even when it doesn't, when it actively is making it harder for them to access support they might need, when it's easy for them to bypass, when it might drive them to accessing worse via the dark Web... that you are unwilling to listen to any reason about.

Good little government drone.

I know exactly how accurate IP addresses are - this is a solution to that problem. Dynamic IPs don't give you any privacy, because ISPs have to keep a log of IP addresses against user accounts (for seven years, I think - this was part of Blair's anti-terror legislation).

And yes, you can verify in a coffee shop, and then that data is either stored as a cookie or against your user account on the site's data storage mechanism. When you subsequently access it from somewhere else, your new IP address is associated with that ID, so they can still identify you from that new information with a high enough probability of accuracy that they'll be able use it in court (especially if you're using a broadband connection, which a simple netblock lookup will confirm).