The UK government is like: “submit ID first before you use iPhone”, like WTF? As apparently, they are considering on making that the default way to unlock a cellphone whilst spying on you (like they already are) keeping tabs on what apps you’re currently using, have downloaded or purchases made online.

Their Online Safety Act is stupid ever since it was enforced last year as that has done nothing except for making people bypass it entirely (like there’s cases of game characters used to circumvent age verification & facial scans) so I’ll assume the same will happen with this (fake ID’s) just to unlock iPhones.

  • PierceTheBubble@lemmy.world
    5·
    1 day ago

    has done nothing except for making people bypass it entirely

    Which seems to be by design, based on similarity, to approaches taken by other governments: shifting the blame to citizens (reasonably) circumventing the legislation (creating the typical infighting), and granting further excuses to further tighten government control. Legislation as such, can only be introduced under a false pretense, or few politicians dare to be in support of such works. If introduced to “protect the children”, you can gradually shape it to effectively fulfill your interest; instead of spoiling true intentions right away.

    • FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      2·
      8 hours ago

      Agree. Also it creates a false dichotomy in peoples minds. If you fight the orwellian creep into every kind of tech, you must not care about the children! What kind of sociopath is against protecting children!!

      Really, I do believe there are many parts of the world children should be protected from. But NOT by giving away our freedom. NOT by turning the world into one huge mass survielance device. NOT by going full 1984. I can be in favor of protecting children even if I object to dragnet surveilance.

      • PierceTheBubble@lemmy.world
        1·
        2 hours ago

        Yes, totally. In my opinion parents bare full responsibility over their under-age child (not the state, nor platforms: unless catered specifically towards children), and should be legally held accountable when neglecting their child, whether that be physically or digitally.

        It’s insane to me, there’s parents allowing their child unrestricted access to the internet: not restricting them from getting into contact with complete strangers; like this couldn’t escalate to physical contact. There’s countless children’s platforms, which generally shouldn’t allow interaction between users; and where it is necessary, perhaps require parents to give explicit permission.

        It honestly makes more sense to me, to have adults prove they’re under-age: to be able to access a children’s platform; than children (and as a result: everyone, including adults) having to prove they’re of-age: to be able to access an adult platform. But it seems this concept is completely foreign to politicians.