European "age verification" "app" forcing everyone to use Android or iOS

https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/av-doc-technical-specification/discussions/19

584 424 9 days ago

Regardless of whether you personally use Android or iOS, I think that we can all agree that it is not right to be forced to use a specific platform in order to access almost any Internet services.

Aaargh203182• 9 days ago

This is only an issue if it's the only way of verifying your age. If it's still accessible to everyone and this makes it significantly easier for 99.9999999% of people then why not?

choo-t6• 9 days ago

Easier than… not using age verification ?

It's not like it's a feature for you the end user, it doesn't solve any of your problems, on the contrary, it creates new ones.

roundabout-host32• 9 days ago

Well, the plan is for it to be the only one. And even if it isn't, what's the alternative? Persona again? No thanks. They could have helped and made an alternative version of this system which used the ID chip plugged into a desktop PC, but they intentionally won't do so.

perching_aix4• 9 days ago

A certified Real Opinion (tm). The only thing missing is the checkmark.

Beijinger3• 9 days ago

I am not a fan of such an "app". But the app is, as far as I understand, for things like Facebook, TikTok etc.

Are there any other Operating Systems than iOS, Android or Android flavors?

WebOS was nice but who is still using this? Symbian? Can you even use Social Media Apps with another phone OS?

troupo• 9 days ago

Are there any other Operating Systems than iOS, Android or Android flavors?

I remember a gov.uk team presentation. They had a usecase of someone using a PS Vita to access a government assistance program because that was the only device they had access to.

Among 450 million people in the EU there are definitely more OSes than just latest versions of iOS and Android.

uniq7• 9 days ago

Are there any other Operating Systems than iOS, Android or Android flavors

Yes, there are many more: GNU/Linux, Windows, macOS, *BSD, etc.

This will prevent people who only own a computer and not a modern iOS/Android smartphone from accessing services and platforms.

This also sets a very strong anti-competition pressure. Which company will try now to invest on developing a new OS for smartphones if we already know users will not be able to access the most popular services & platforms with it?

anthk• 9 days ago

Well, that would boost up torrent and sites and places like Usenet and IRC with no age verification at all. English speakers can just use overseas servers (or non-UE services such as the ones in Switzerland). And maybe Usenet servers outside the US too.

Spanish speakers in Spain will just register services in Latinamerica sites with a VPN. Despite the dialect differences, non-jargon Spanish it's understood everywhere and once they got their user registered they can switch the country anytime.

Distros like Trisquel will just set their sites and mirrors outside the EU. And, well, if they provide a portable torrent client for Windows among the torrent the law would be utterly broken.

Beijinger3• 7 days ago

Oh, sorry, I was only thinking phone. I use myself an unsusual OS, Bodhi Linux, but for phones the selection is much more limited.

sebtron2• 9 days ago

Are there any other Operating Systems than iOS, Android or Android flavors?

Like Windows, MacOS and Linux?

lexlambda2• 9 days ago

as far as I'm aware, Adroid is not the same as the requirement here, which requires specific Google attestation.

There is GrapheneOS, HarmonyOS by Huawei, LineageOS for older phones and many more Android ROMs.

Additionally, Linux phones exist and are already sold in the EU to consumers, not just a prototype.

There's really no justification around limiting the OS selection.

There is also Linux, Windows, MacOS and many more operatint system not limited to phones.

Beijinger3• 7 days ago

All this are Android flavors.

ThatMedicIsASpy• 9 days ago

I'm on SailfishOS since a couple of years

hogwasher• 9 days ago

Yes. LineageOS, GrapheneOS, Arch, Sailfish, various other open distros, Windows Phone, and a surprising number of random proprietary options (these are sometimes based on Android, and have some social media apps, but can't run regular Android apps that weren't specifically designed or altered for it) including for modern dumbphones. There are always more over time, too.

There's also old versions of iOS and Android. We don't want to end up in a situation where people are locked into one of only two vendors and can be forced to keep buying the newest model to use an ID app that only supports the most recent software. That'd be even worse for the environment than the current disposable smartphone culture.

Everything to do with the age verification push is corrupt and stupid to begin with. There isn't even a legitimate cause behind all this for forcing ANY app, even if it didn't also force people to buy a specific, expensive, privacy-invading American product.

mrsssnake2• 8 days ago

Even in a world where Android and iOS have 100% of market share, the law (including indirect but obvious consequences of the law) should not force using them.

mghackerlady6• 8 days ago

SailfishOS, various incompatible blends of AOSP, KaiOS, and the Mocor based OSs run on various UNISOC based dumb phones

iLoveOncall3• 9 days ago

I agree with the sentiment but is there even any phone that doesn't run Android (or derivatives) or iOS and that can install modern "apps"?

hahahaa• 9 days ago

Run linux?

roundabout-host32• 8 days ago

I don't understand. Even if you run GNU/Linux, when you access a restricted website on it, you will have to scan a QR code with the Android or iOS app. <https://cinema.ageverification.dev> is a demo which shows that.

_factor• 9 days ago

This will ensure there never is.

sebtron2• 9 days ago

Why does it have to be a phone? Some people still use tablets, laptops and, believe it or not, desktop PCs.

xienze3• 9 days ago

Smartphones are much more ubiquitous than any of those devices. Across all demographics.

iLoveOncall3• 9 days ago

Tablets would be compatible, and there's absolutely no indication that there won't be a separate system for computers.

It's actually disingenuous to think there won't be. This is a repository for a mobile app only.

lexlambda2• 9 days ago

You must realize, age verification is for more then just Googles Android apps.

Such a strong new legal framework must consider consumer hardware actually in use:

- Android variations Like GrapheneOS, Huawei's HarmonyOS, older phones running custom ROMs - Linux phones, which are sold in the EU and by EU companies

- Desktop operating systems

All of them can run Web Apps, and thus need age verification

pluralmonad4• 8 days ago

Well, none of them _need_ age verification.

zzril• 9 days ago

My PinePhone runs postmarketOS and can technically run every modern Linux desktop "app".

roundabout-host32• 9 days ago

Android derivatives are not considered enough, because they will not be Google-attested, so the app will refuse them.

mrsssnake2• 8 days ago

Even on the Android or iOS phone the EU app won't run if the device owner made even a tiniest change of the operating system without Google or Apple approval.

The EU developed system excludes the 1% of people for which the popular mobile solutions do not work and also make the rest 99% totally dependent on the selected corporations.

asadotzler• 8 days ago

Windows and Mac have billions of users.

amelius3• 9 days ago

Isn't there a niche platform that can sue the hell out of the EU here?

fsflover4• 8 days ago

Perhaps https://fsfe.org or https://edri.org can do that.

sschueller• 9 days ago

Two platforms that are not owned by companies in the EU. Effectively handing the keys to your state ID to private foreign enterprise.

What will you do when Apple/Google or the US Government effective immediately delete/block your app? The impact initially may be small but after a few years if widely used, you can break a country.

Scaled• 9 days ago

Another juicy threat vector is forcing the app stores to stealthily ship a modified version of the app that sends copies of the IDs and/or tracking data to US intelligence services.

(Reminder: we know Persona's verification software already shares verification data with the federal government. It's a leap to modifying other apps, but within the realm of possibility of US government power. There is absolutely desire from them to gather blackmail material on politically important people, and age verification systems connected to adult sites/apps are a great way to do it)

roundabout-host32• 9 days ago

This is a problem, but not the only one. The biggest one is that the phones in question are locked and deny user freedom. I would not be content with an European "alternative", but which is as locked as iOS.

gobip• 9 days ago

Don't fall for the trap. The question isn't how we should technically force age verification on anybody. The question is why they're pushing it onto everyone. I did not consent to this, neither did you.

ilumanty2• 9 days ago

Yes, I said it before and I will say it again: We should invest our energy in the discussion whether to implement it and not already wonder how to implement it.

Shifting this question benefits only those who want to force this upon us.

tikkabhuna2• 9 days ago

Doesn't the "how to implement" determine whether to implement it? A poor implementation shouldn't be done, but a good implementation could make it simpler for companies to verify the ages of users, limit information passed to companies, offer a quality of life improvement for users.

toasty2288• 8 days ago

And what do "they" want? It's not like they don't already know your age, name, ID number or your browsing history

jck862• 9 days ago

But it is needed to protect the children. The politicians say so, so it has to be true. Being against this is very dangerous to our children and democracy. There is no alternative.

Seriously, there is something tremendously wrong with governance when politicians keep changing the whole world around us, without us having any say in it at all. The threat this measure poses to the internet and society is significant, yet it is being pushed through without any substantial debate or push back. This just is not how decent and actual democracies should function. What messed up timeline is this?

roundabout-host32• 9 days ago

Children die from wrongly-prepared food, thus we should only allow people to eat at McDonald's from now on! /s

anal_reactor3• 9 days ago

Seriously, there is something tremendously wrong with governance when politicians keep changing the whole world around us, without us having any say in it at all.

That's where you're wrong. Most people actually do agree with age verification. Just because a decision is stupid it doesn't mean it's undemocratic. Trump was elected democratically, twice. Brexit passed through a referendum.

inigyou10• 8 days ago

Maybe we should protect the children and then they couldn't use the excuse

Terr_• 8 days ago

The politicians say so, so it has to be true.

The Politician's Syllogism (or Fallacy) [0]:

1. We must do something.

2. This is something.

3. Therefore, we must do this.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism

toasty2288• 8 days ago

The question is why they're pushing it onto everyone. I did not consent to this, neither did you.

The representatives elected by Europeans did though: 483 votes in favor, 92 against

afandian4• 8 days ago

I doubt those representatives gathered a sufficient mandate from their public given the huge consequence.

I’m no conspiracy theorist, but it does seem that there’s an international influence outweighing democracy.

Cui bono?

afandian4• 8 days ago

There’s a huge amount of stuff that the EU does that no one consented to, or had a realistic democratic avenue to influence.

I’m in the UK and very anti Brexit. But were we still in, I would have no idea how to influence what happens behind those closed doors at the European Commision.

Granted the current UK Labour/ Conservative pact on these issues show they’re completely out of control. But I still theoretically know how I could influence policy.

wobfan5• 8 days ago

But I still theoretically know how I could influence policy.

I mean even in the EU there's theoretic ways to influence policy, it's just that the system is currently sabotaged and/or partly not strong enough to withstand politicians who want to actively work against it.

Not being for or against UK or Brexit, but I don't think this is a EU problem. These kinds of problems exist in all European democracies, at least this is what it feels like currently.

port112• 7 days ago

Theoretically, you vote for the Parliament, and they influence the Commission.

The Parliament and Courts keep the Commission in check, although their… misguided rule of majority is bound to allow some nonsense to pass. Especially since the Commission is, in my view, made up of people that do NOT want what the citizens do. You could argue they represent the majority of their specific countries, but even that is stretching things a bit given how many people actually vote.

So: the Parliament, the Courts (you can bring them issues), the European Citizens’ Initiative, and indirectly through your own country’s agencies (e.g. your local DPA).

It’s not that different from the high levels of indirection and bureaucracy in most democracies, I think. (Not that I’m defending the EU, there’s plenty to attack.)

pluralmonad4• 8 days ago

I know this sounds bad, but when has consent mattered before? I agree with you wholeheartedly, but consent is simply not something these power structures value.

__MatrixMan__• 8 days ago

The halls of power are full of pedophiles. Why do you think they want to gather data on children?

undersuit3• 8 days ago

I and many others have been banned from Twitter for the last two weeks because of a new process[1]. I have to view all links in incognito tabs or hand over my biometric data to a trillionaire. Just don't use Twitter some may quip, well that would be a great group effort, but I can't do it alone.

[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/Twitter/comments/1uk6a98/lets_confi...

stubish• 8 days ago

'They' are not pushing age verification onto everyone. 'We' are pushing it onto ourselves. People want this. It is popular all over the world. If 'they' are doing anything, it is subverting what people want into something else. Which is the worry here, as people asked for age verification but didn't ask to be locked into the mobile phone duopoly. The system people want for age verification could be implemented as Firefox plugin. If it requires these attestation services for binary blobs provided by the government, it includes features someone else wants.

Peaches4Rent2• 8 days ago

They want to protect the children so that they can take them to the island

GuB-42• 7 days ago

Some people consent to it, and they have a voice too. If they win and you didn't also consider the technical solution, you will find yourself not only with a law you disagree with, but also with a terrible technical solution.

So whatever you opinion is on the subject of forcing age verification, it is worth looking at the technical solution, especially if it is your domain of expertise.

port112• 7 days ago

Bruce Schneier goes on about this A LOT, and you’re exactly on point. If the knowledgeable tech people don’t get into policy, it will become law drafted by lawyers and MBAs. Man, I wish I knew how to get into policy…

spaqin• 9 days ago

Funny how the worry of "digital exclusion" of the elders who would never be able to use a smartphone has been thrown out of the window in recent years.

shevy-java3• 9 days ago

That's because they are lying to the people here. Just look at the "we must protect the children" lobbyists. It has never been about the children in the first place, that is just the convenient lie to force an authoritarian system in place.

trashb4• 9 days ago

Don't worry the focus is on the youth with this legislation. I have the suspicion it's about indoctrination of surveillance as normal.

Additionally the amount of elderly that don't have or can't use a phone or don't have anyone that can help them with it will decrease rapidly anyway. In my experience it's mostly the same generation as the people that remember WWII.

roundabout-host32• 9 days ago

They probably think that they do not use "social media" either, so it does not affect them. But elders are not the only category. In any case, it is fundamentally wrong to be forced to use a specific platform, American or European, mobile or desktop, for Internet service access.

perching_aix4• 8 days ago

I don't think this is relevant for them by definition, so that's an odd point to raise. It's hard to be encumbered by having to manage a digital identity, when you don't do anything digitally in the first place.

mghackerlady6• 8 days ago

And the youths who just... don't like smartphones. We exist

wobfan5• 8 days ago

Some years ago I had deliberate weeks in my life where I just went back to my old 2G brick phone from like 2001. I was amazed how it was still working perfectly. I mean, yes, 2G will be shutdown even in Germany soon, so the old phone isn't an option either way anymore. But there are 4G brick phones which I'd like to use then. But this won't be possible. My bus ticket is digital and can't be screenshotted or printed, my student card too, same with the "Deutschlandticket" (rail ticket in Germany). Hell, even my sauna sends me a QR code to get in via Email now. I mean, at least I can print it out. But this trend will only continue.

g-b-r2• 9 days ago

It should be stressed that Play Integrity also requires having a Google account and logging in to it on the phone.

perching_aix4• 9 days ago

I guess it's that time of the week again. Do we have a sockpuppet account to welcome in you by any chance?

The (actual) complaint of the thread appears to be resolved already (which would make sense given this is old news):

In the README, the following is listed:
> App and device verification based on Google Play Integrity API and Apple App Attestation

The README.md does not appear to feature such a section (nor any of the other files for that matter).

Separately, the title is editorializing, and falsely suggests there's some big bad EU app, even though the app that does exist is merely a reference implementation, not for end user usage. There's a reason the repository you're linking a discussion thread from only holds specs.

Edit:

the specification does not prohibit it

My account has been rate-limited, so I'm not able to reply directly. Nevertheless, I'm sure you can appreciate that your title is still quite the lie then. "Not prohibiting it" is very different from "forcing", after all.

roundabout-host32• 9 days ago

In the thread you will find many examples of national implementations which do require attestation. It was removed from the README as a PR measure, but in practice the specification does not prohibit it, so national implementations will still use it.

kubo6472• 9 days ago

Yeah, I am leaning towards never to use anything that is forced to implement any kind of age verification.

shevy-java3• 9 days ago

Well, they could change the laws to force people into slavery here, e. g. by forcing them to use US corporations ("if you do not have an app from Google store, you are excluded from society"). In that case they see age sniffing as ultimate tool of spying on everyone, so this is probably the real goal. What we all can see is that this has never been about children - they are just abused as the red hering here.

trashb4• 9 days ago

"if you do not have an app from Google store, you are excluded from society"

It would be a difficult choice but would it really be so bad to be excluded from such a society? Don't a lot of people from silicon valley dream to be farmers in the wildlands?

dheera• 8 days ago

You won't be able to see a doctor when you're sick.

You won't be able to open a bank account to receive your salary.

You won't be able to buy train or plane tickets.

My point is I am most worried that these kind of "digital verification" type things most impact actual necessities. The social media I couldn't care less about. "I just won't use it" isn't really a solution.

toasty2288• 8 days ago

You already can't do any of these things without some kind of governmental issued ID which already has your birthdate on it.

idk why people are so scared of it, do you really believe they don't know what you do on your personal internet connection linked to your name and payment data ?

Like yeah sure if you pay everything in cash and never use internet OK that's a big problem, but for the average HN shitposter who's already terminally online it really doesn't change much

____mr____• 8 days ago

You already have to provide your passport/health insurance/legal id which already has your identity to your airline/doctor/employer. Why is this suddenly a problem when it is digitized?

shevy-java3• 9 days ago

What baffles me the most is how the EU commission constantly works in favour of US corporations in the long run. This is really strange. Something does not work in the explanations given by the EU commission. To me it looks like US lobbyists run the EU here.

xienze3• 9 days ago

Well, they really, really, really want the end game of tying (real) identity to digital identity. And they want it now, not 10+ years in the future when _theoretically_ there _might_ be some EU-friendly mobile operating system that everyone uses. Right now, Google and Apple are basically the entire smartphone market, so they gotta work with what they've got if they want these plans to come to fruition.

villish• 8 days ago

The EU gets billions of dollars from fining US companies. That money is used to pay for a lot of programs and the bean counters don't wan't that source of funding to dry up.

blop• 9 days ago

This is the elephant in the room regarding the big "digital sovereignty" talks in the EU. For the moment in the EU institutions the focus is mostly at the post-acceptance stage that everything must eventually migrate off US clouds. There is still some denial and hope that things will go back to "before" because it's going to be extremely costly to migrate, but at least high level EU civil servants start to see the strategic value of moving out.

However there is ZERO talk about mobile platforms... No alternative solution like linux for the desktop, no money or care given to the few alternative that tentatively exist, and zero talk about forcing companies (at least for the ones shipping android phones) to open up their firmwares and allow users to install alternative OS if they want to sell in the EU.

So whilst the backend guys more or less got the memo about sovereignty, I think there is still a lot of educational work to do regarding end user devices and what kind of digital slavery hole we're digging ourselves in...

cbg0• 9 days ago

Isn't AOSP a thing?

spwa43• 9 days ago

You mean giving China control over it?

(because you still need the hardware made, and it's not like the EU commission is even prepared to fix BSPs for that hardware)

The EU has endlessly sold critical infrastructure to US, India and China while actively sabotaging efforts to rebuild it and now want it back - for free. This is criticized as having a low chance of success, as well as being a pretty unreasonable demand.

notabotiswear2• 9 days ago

Writings on the wall can’t be clearer on AOSP’s future…

jchw• 9 days ago

This app requires Google Play. AOSP alone won't cut it.

mytailorisrich2• 9 days ago

Because this is all a political move. This so-called "EU sovereignty" drive is in fact aimed at further reducing sovereignty of the member states via further transfer of power and control to the EU.

These digital ID wallets do exactly that. Member states lose control of the ID infrastructure, which will now be controlled by the EU. There isn't much sovereignty left at national level...

joe_mamba4• 9 days ago

This is totally not the EU version of China's social credit score system and WeChat SSO system.

It will totally not be used to sanction you the moment you become a nuisance to the EU elites by saying "wrong speech" that goes against their mandated doctrine or pointing out their acts of corruption or dismantling of democracy.

The EU building in Brussels even has the word "DEMOCRACY" plastered on the front in large bold letters[1], in case you forgot.

[1] https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/media/photo/P-069521

reloadtak2• 8 days ago

Each member state has to implement the system themselves. Where is the loss of control?

omnimus2• 9 days ago

This is not entirely true. I don't have much details but I know people who started to work on two separate free software projects aiming to make supported mobile OS. These projects couldn't get funding before but they do now. Afaik it's still a battle with AI companies lobbying that soverign AI is much more important than mobile OS but there is some growing interest. Imho i don't even think some linux based alternative to Android would be that hard to pull off but it's the hw companies that will be skeptical to build hw for such OS. I would have to be some govs puahing it as secure gov devices first.

AnthonyMouse10• 8 days ago

Which is all well and good, but who is going to use those projects if the law requires them to use Android or iOS for age verification?

mghackerlady6• 8 days ago

They could try and put money into funding Jolla/sailfish/whatever

tokai• 8 days ago

That wont help anything. Then you are just force to use Android, iOS, or Sailfish. It need to be a platform agnostic thing, else you're just hitching the fulcrum of civil society on private company.

tistoon• 8 days ago

Ok we get new HN articles every week now about migrating to EU solutions and digital sovereignty. At this point EU should just do as China, please: have EU their own cloud providers, softwares, hardwares, phones and also its own closed-EU only mini-internet barrier by a big EU digital policy border. Just like China, NKorea and Russia. They would be finally at peace with themselves.

api• 8 days ago

Mobile is the UI/UX equivalent of… I don’t even know… a moon landing? A wonder of the world?

I’m not saying it can’t be duplicated. I’m saying if you want to build a mobile platform you need to approach it with appropriate respect for the incredible difficulty of making something that usable.

roundabout-host32• 8 days ago

There are experimental mobile platforms, and they work fine. They won't appeal to the mass-market but there's really no reason to disallow them.

account427• 8 days ago

UI/UX is not the problem at all, app compatibility/availability is.

literalAardvark3• 8 days ago

Nah that's complete bull. It's been a solved problem since Android 2.0.

The only thing they're improving on mobile these days are addictiveness and data collection.

rpdillon• 7 days ago

Indeed. Power management alone is a massive research area with never-ending complexity across a bunch of domains. And nailing the ecosystem correctly is very hard (both devices and software). Security is another bottomless pit of research and improvement. When trillion-dollar companies like Amazon and Microsoft ceded mobile to Google and Apple, it was a good demonstration of how hard a successful mobile platform is to get off the ground.

zoobab• 8 days ago

"zero talk about forcing companies (at least for the ones shipping android phones) to open up their firmwares and allow users to install alternative OS if they want to sell in the EU."

Complete public datasheets on how to program the hardware should be a requirement fit a DMA2.0.

JodieBenitez• 7 days ago

The sovereignty thing is a theater. Many french unis use Google cloud because they're broke and can't maintain in-house services, and none gives a damn.

wolvesechoes• 6 days ago

"This is the elephant in the room regarding the big "digital sovereignty" talks in the EU"

The elephant in the room is that it is just talk, as always in case of EU.

pjmlp2• 5 days ago

Yes, spot on, the talk is always around Office and co.

raxxorraxor• 2 days ago

China made its own linux distros almost immediately. And as far as I know it is widely in use (Kylin etc.?).

Some nations in the western sphere seem to gladly outsource such critical infrastructure. Thinking about the Korean defence manufacturer whose contact mail was something@gmail.com in an advert I saw a few days ago. Perhaps Google will integrate some fast reply function for some instant AA ordnance delivery?

roundabout-host32• 2 days ago

I don't think that we should want some locked-down insolution forced upon everyone, European or not.

skrebbel6• 9 days ago

I agree wholeheartedly with the argument raised in this github issue, but I think people are wrong to be skeptical about the concept of a government-issued age verification app.

Thing is, the status quo is absolutely worse. My 13yo son likes making Roblox games. Suddenly, some months ago, Roblox made a change where you’re not allowed to share your games with friends unless you do “age verification”, apparently in some misguided bid to beat the pedos. In Roblox’ case, this means sharing your 3D likeness with some sketchy American business who pinky promises to delete said data after. I don’t want random American tech companies to have my kids’ biometric info like that, able to sell it to whoever asks. Nor my passport or anything like that.

I’d much prefer a government supplied app, that’s guaranteed to protect my privacy, and has no business incentive to sell my data, where I can see what data about me (or my son) is shared with Roblox or whichever sleazy business wants it.

Obviously this only makes sense if the government is less sleazy than the average American tech business, but for all its faults, I think that currently holds for the EU (and most of its member countries). There’s plenty precedent of EU governments doing privacy-conscious apps right (the Dutch covid tracking app comes to mind).

I hope they see reason and fix this here issue.

knorker6• 9 days ago

Funny you use Netherlands as a good example, considering that famously, their existing unusually thorough registry was super helpful for the Nazis rounding up jews later.

I don't think it's Godwin's Law when you are so spot on, exactly describing the worst case.

tikkabhuna2• 9 days ago

Why would an age verification app need to know your ethnicity/religion?

Governments likely already know your name, age, place of birth, so having an app with a standard API for verifying users isn't giving the government additional data.

snottynose5• 9 days ago

Not necessary to hearken back so far in history. In our present age the intelligence services consistently do not respect privacy rights of citizens, even when they are legally bound to.

https://www-bitsoffreedom-nl.translate.goog/2026/07/06/aivd-...

trashb4• 9 days ago

Additionally there was a leak of the personal information of covid patients, the official tracking app was not affected as far as I can tell.

However even if the app is secure the storage and handling of the information is a different matter and it has been shown that care is not always taken.

skrebbel6• 8 days ago

I don’t follow. The Dutch tax office has substantially more complete records right now. Even if they don’t track race or religion as explicitly as they did in the 40s, your hypothetical invading Nazis can run some local AI over people’s last names and get close enough.

How is, of all things, an age verification app going to make that worse?

I mean I understand your argument in principle but it seems you’re arguing against ~every present-day functional government and not against an age verification app.

izacus9• 8 days ago

Funny you use Netherlands as a good example, considering that famously, their existing unusually thorough registry was super helpful for the Nazis rounding up jews later.

To avoid rounding up the jews you... create a government that doesn't round up jews.

You don't fight arbitraty useful tools which then end up in bizarre situations like in US where people can't vote because of this bizarre idea that government shouldn't track voter lists.

EU governments mostly have a list of registered citizens with their birth dates and their adresses. And noone has been rounding up anyone for almost a century... something we can't say for another world country which apparently doesn't keep records of their voters (useful to prevent people of colors from voting!) and somehow is rounding up people on the streets right now.

choo-t6• 9 days ago

You can (and should) be mad at the government and at Roblox at the same time.

Also, don't use Roblox, you can freely share games made with PICO-8, Löve, Godot, Rpgmaker, Game maker and the like, no need to go to the hell scape that is Roblox and its dark patern and locked down ecosystem.

pibaker2• 9 days ago

None of the engines you mentioned are nearly as approachable as roblox when it comes to making a 3D game with little programming or art skills.

Don't get me wrong. I agree roblox is a very shady operation, but that does not erase the fact that their platform is unmatched when it comes to letting kids make games.

skrebbel6• 8 days ago

My kid does Godot and TIC-80 (a bit like PICO-8 but more forgiving) as well. Those are great but they don’t beat Roblox on distribution nor multiplayer by a long shot.

I agree that Roblox is a hellscape when you want to make serious games, eg make money from it or sth, but if you just want to mess around making a “supermarket horror tower defense” game full of in-jokes and then have all five of your friends join it, and It Just Works, sorry but nothing comes close to Roblox.

Until they required age verification for that ofc.

Also, just don't ever buy any Robux and kids will auto steer away from the shitty games that need it. That filters out 95% of the badness of Roblox right out the gate.

inigyou10• 8 days ago

When I was a kid I loved this obscure multiplayer game engine called BYOND. In fact it's so obscure that even mentioning it provides several bits of fingerprinting. It technically still exists today, but it's been on life support for 15 years. We should make something like that again.

Besides the game engine, it provided central identity (optional - you could allow players to sign in as Guest), a website to browse games and servers, a forum to discuss games and programming, and an IDE with a built-in sprite editor (it was 2D), map editor and object browser.

pjc502• 9 days ago

a government supplied app, that’s guaranteed to protect my privacy

This is a bit of a 64,000 euro question, though. Look very closely at what the government exemptions for GDPR are.

mnky9800n• 9 days ago

What are they?

em500• 9 days ago

Government issued versus corporate issued age verification is a false dichotomy. There are other options, such as refusing games that require them. (Yes, we do have a teen, and yes we did exactly that with Roblox.)

jstummbillig2• 9 days ago

Pretending that those options are equal is a false dichotomy. Not participating is an option up to a point, and then it is increasingly limiting all other options.

joe_mamba4• 9 days ago

There are other options, such as refusing games that require them.

How about the option of the state not being so tyrannical in meddling about what people anonymously do online in their free time?

skrebbel6• 8 days ago

Fwiw we did that with Roblox too, but I hate it because Roblox Studio was a pretty damn fun collaborative gamedev experience.

I mean his classmates argue with their parents about whether they can install TikTok (and most parents lose). Meanwhile I’m denying my son the right to make a game together with a friend. It’s so creative and so educative and I’m saying no to it. It sucks and I hate Roblox for making something so cool and then taking it away for such stupid reasons.

I’d happily pay a license fee or sth. But I’m not gonna let them scan my son’s face.

wonderwonder3• 8 days ago

Thats obviously fine to do but it is very much going to have consequences for some kids. My kids spend hours a week playing roblox with their IRL friends. 10 - 15 kids on a group call on speaker phone all logged into the same code laughing and yelling for a couple hours a night. If I was to suddenly tell them that they can't play those games with their friends it would have very real effects on their social life. My kids spend a ton of time outside with friends but to ignore that they also spend time gaming with them is not an option.

roundabout-host32• 9 days ago

The "app" could be a good solution, if it didn't require attested Android or iOS. It could, for example, have me plug my ID chip into my GNU/Linux system and expose it with a standard protocol. That would be no problem. The problem is that they do not want such a way.

In any case, I think that age gating would not be needed if the platforms were regulated to remove addictive recommendation algorithms.

yorwba• 8 days ago

Using an ID card reader is already possible. See here for a list of Linux repos supporting German IDs: https://www.ausweisapp.bund.de/en/open-source Finding a working hardware/software combination for your ID card is up to you.

The app is an alternative for people who don't want to buy or carry around a card reader, but who already have a smartphone.

alistairSH4• 8 days ago

ID chip? Is that something everybody in the EU (or whatever region) has? Is it just embedded in your driver license or passport?

[I'm in the US, we're very ID-averse here, weird, but is what it is]

zh32• 8 days ago

As a purely tactical measure, we use the same older person (me) for age verification for all family members - zero failures so far and it poisons the well.

a21282• 8 days ago

In the case of Roblox they have a horrible system where they estimate your age and only allow you to interact with people of a similar age, meaning if you verified your kid with your face then they'd only be able to interact with adults and not other kids. At least that's the theory. It doesn't take a lot of effort to figure out how a predator could misuse this system to their advantage (which is why I call it horrible)

Reference: https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/39143693116052-...

throw0101d• 8 days ago

As a purely tactical measure, we use the same older person (me) for age verification for all family members - zero failures so far and it poisons the well.

Is there a 'break glass' workflow in case you are not available (e.g., health incident)?

SoftTalker7• 8 days ago

We have had the need to prove age for hundreds of years. To buy alcohol. To drive a car. To vote. We depend on government-issued documents to do this. Not sure why anyone would really expect this to change just because it's online now.

saltwatercowboy• 8 days ago

Very obviously because privacy advocates are concerned by the effects of mass deanonymization. I find it doubtful that you don't grasp that.

elevation2• 8 days ago

Older systems were imperfect and were understood to be. I've meet veterans who joined the Navy at 14 or 16. I've met many College students who can pass as old enough to buy alcohol, especially with a fake id. Dead people are sometimes registered to vote. We know this and have systems to try to catch these exceptions.

But cellphone access is different; it's assumed to be perfect, but it's increasingly being moderated by machine learning heuristics that serve as judge, jury, and executioner, severing your services if a couple of your actions trigger a fuzzy approximation to some of the training data.

AI moderation helps suppress spammers, but it's also punishing false positives, and there is just no recourse. Any ID system that piggybacks on "Apple | Google" is effectively shunning some non trivial portion of society. Governments of the people need to provision their own tech systems that are accessible to all citizens, even those who have run afoul of an AI moderation system.

leonvoss5• 8 days ago

Hundreds? 200 years ago most people did not even have birth certificates. I can think of multiple famous examples of people who lived in Europe 500 to 800 years ago where we don't know their real age. In existing countries with poor state capacity, a lot of people don't have legitimate birth certificates and there is some evidence that they make up their age to some degree. For example on surveys in such countries there are too many people reporting round number ages. My experience in such countries is that you can find very young looking males riding motorcycles late at night around the city and anybody can buy alcohol. That's how it was in the United States "hundreds" of years ago. Please read a book.

wat10000• 8 days ago

Maybe hundred of years, singular. And reading/watching stuff in our own homes has never required any proof of age.

nkrisc• 8 days ago

Proving your age is a relatively new phenomenon. My grandmother, born in Chicago in the 1920s didn't even know her exact age. That is not at all uncommon for her generation.

casey2• 8 days ago

Then get your kid off Roblox. I promise you that Roblox exploits more children in a single day than all sex offenders put together do in a year.

Why is pedophilia such a problem on Roblox? It's because they heavily advertise towards children and one of the fastest ways for children to make money is asking their parents, then next is prostitution. Roblox is uniquely bad because they heavily advertise both products and the "self-made entrepreneur" image to children.

Putting the blame on nebulous "predators" when the system itself is clearly to blame is the very tacit Roblox relies on. Look at vehicular manslaughter are drunk and distracted drivers solely to blame for deaths? Clearly not since there are just as many drunks and phones in Europe as in the US. When the system creates more predators than exist otherwise then you know it needs to change.

If your son likes making games keep him on Godot. Your job as a parent is to find or build a good distribution system. you can see if he is generally interested or if he was pressured by an exploitative system grooming him into pumping out slop for the trough. Age verification is going to make the platform more exploitative in the business sense. Both in that it legitimizes bad practices and lets Roblox target their exploitative practices more effectively.

stravant• 8 days ago

People don't want to make games, they want to make multiplayer games.

Very few kids are going to go though the incredible difficulty of making multiplayer work in something like Godot.

djaro2• 8 days ago

This doesnt work when all of his friends are playing Roblox and play each others games on there

sajithdilshan3• 8 days ago

What you’re proposing works only if the government is always trustworthy and abiding by the rules. But there has been cases that ICE agents in US was able to track down people from their social media posts and in the past Nazis used the address registration lists to track down Jews for deportation to concentration camps.

We don’t know what EU would become in 5 to 10 years in the future, and I would rather not have any identification information about me or family being stored by a government body or any other party that can track/link me or my family members

wsng2• 8 days ago

They have this information anyway if you have an EU passport or an identity card. The government app allows you to share selected properties of these documents with third parties.

joquarky3• 8 days ago

Anyone else remember when RFK Jr wanted an autism registry?

sva_3• 8 days ago

I guess that is one way to manufacture consent.

vrganj7• 8 days ago

As another European, I agree with GP.

I don't fully trust my government. But I definitely trust it more than any American tech company.

I can also vote out my government. I can't do that for Big Tech.

photios• 8 days ago

Roblox made a change where you’re not allowed to share your games with friends unless you do “age verification”

My son had a similar "making games" interests and I just showed him the Godot engine. Roblox bosses are doing you a favor. Act now :D

clickety_clack• 8 days ago

I hear you on the overall privacy issues related to age verification with US Corps. My concern with government registries of personal information is related to things like:

- Netherlands, WWII: The Dutch civil registry meticulously recorded religion. It’s a major reason ~75% of Dutch Jews were killed, the highest rate in occupied Western Europe (vs ~25% in France, where records were poorer).

- US, Japanese internment: The Census Bureau provided block-level data on Japanese Americans in 1942 despite confidentiality guarantees; 2007 research showed individual names and addresses were shared too.

- Rwanda, 1994: Belgian colonial administrators had put ethnicity (Hutu/Tutsi) on national ID cards in the 1930s. Sixty years later those cards were the primary tool at genocide checkpoints.

There’s loads more. Europe may be safe now so it feels safe to give government this information. However, as shown in all the instances above, the information was collected for one reason and used for a wholly different reason when times changed.

Who knows what kinds of ethnicities, beliefs, behaviors or personal histories will be the focus of future regimes? It could be Roblox users, HN commenters, people who religiously repost x.com links as xcancel.com ones, anything. Whatever it is, they will have access to all the data on any system we allow them to record. This isn’t even a totally made up hypothetical from far away places, multiple governments in Europe were doing this kind of thing just decades ago. Historically speaking, we are all currently living in an unusually peaceful era, that will likely be temporary for many of us.

iso16312• 8 days ago

- Netherlands, WWII: The Dutch civil registry meticulously recorded religion. It’s a major reason ~75% of Dutch Jews were killed, the highest rate in occupied Western Europe (vs ~25% in France, where records were poorer).

Records were poorer in France because René Carmille and the French resistance sabotaged the machines. Machines made by a large tech company which was a competitor to IBM.

Who knows what kinds of ethnicities, beliefs, behaviors or personal histories will be the focus of future regimes?

Absolutely. But I do know who has that data -- big tech, and it's willing to sell it for a nominal price. No doubt that price will be higher for a deaparate government wanting to kill everyone with green eyes, but that just means a higher profit margin for facebook as they mine their shadow profiles.

vladms• 8 days ago

My opinions is that an idiotic government will use whatever data it can find, and we should be more worried that one appears than imagine that because they do not have some data they will not do some idiocy.

I am not for collecting all data without a reason, sometimes probably too much is collected. But idiots can come with any rule if they want just to find someone to blame (I mean, they already use skin color or accent so if in need, they can come up with a rule like "born on a Monday").

mindslight• 8 days ago

It doesn't have to be an either or dichotomy. For example, you could pass laws that make it illegal for an online game to demand age verification, identification, biometrics, etc. The main reason for any of this are some corporate attorneys justifying their own salaries based on "what if" and scaremongering. Regardless of how much personal information they succeed at demanding at this stage, or how [in]effective it is at addressing their claimed problems, they will be back again pushing for even more until they're actually told a hard "no".

generalizations• 8 days ago

a government supplied app, that’s guaranteed to protect my privacy

[citation needed]

lifestyleguru• 8 days ago

this means sharing your 3D likeness with some sketchy American business who pinky promises to delete said data after. I don’t want random American tech companies to have my kids’ biometric info like that, able to sell it to whoever asks. Nor my passport or anything like that.

Actually the market leader app for scanning faces and documents is an Israeli company. They encourage to use mobile for scanning, for your convenience. They promise they delete the data. Yeah, if they're lying you can sue them in Israel.

monksy• 8 days ago

It's isreali as well: https://www.404media.co/id-verification-service-for-tiktok-u...

jcattle• 8 days ago

Same as for banks. Downloading some verification app with a confidence inspiring 1.2 rating on the app store, getting on a call with some random gig worker looking like they are taking the call in their living room and wiggling your ID around while giving a thumbs up is not the way I would like to prove my identity to a bank.

But there's no alternative. The EU digital identity wallet would be the alternative. You control and exactly see, what kind of information the bank is getting from you and you can be sure that it doesn't flow through some sketchy third-party identification service.

fy20• 7 days ago

Here in the Baltics we already have an app for that. It's used to login to banks and government websites.

Recently one supermarket chain added it for age verification on their self-service checkouts (e.g. buying alcohol).

The problem with this is you do not know what information they get, I guess the supermarket gets my full name, date of birth, personal code, etc. Their privacy policy says it will not be stored, but that means nothing.

https://www.smart-id.com/

jsmith45• 5 days ago

The original design intention of this approach was that wallet apps were independant and interchangable, with any wallet app able to talk to any attestation provider, to get age attestation tokens, and any site/app able to talk to any wallet. The wallet's job was merely to securely hold a bunch of attestations tokens, and dispense them to other sites/apps on request.

So you could use an open source app, or government provided one, or one provided by your bank, whatever you trust the most to not be recording data about relying parties and sending it somewhere you don't want.

The version of the document currently on GitHub has heavily deviated from that original intention. This is very unfortunate.

Even so this version is supposed to still be incapable by design of sharing any data with a relying party other than "over 18" and was designed such that the only way for a relying party to determine your identity is to be colluding with the attestation provider, or by colluding with the wallet app.

To attempt to address the first issue they have the unfortunately optional ZKP protocol. The original design assumed that users could find a wallet that they were certain would not collude with the RPs, and was considered a non-issue, but unfortunately it is a huge hole in the current version.

Erikun• 9 days ago

Im confused, the github discussion says that the README says

App and device verification based on Google Play Integrity API and Apple App Attestation

But I can't find that anywhere. Am I missing something?

perching_aix4• 9 days ago

Am I missing something?

Yes, that this post is propaganda.

trashb4• 9 days ago

From what I can gather from the linked discussion it was started as a pull request or a issue and was transferred to a discussion later. Perhaps some data was lost there? If you expand the comments fully there is also mention of a nuked merge request, I assume it was related to this text.

Edit it was not visible from the discussion link but it is visible from the issue link below. Also it seems to be transferred over from a totally different repo?

https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/av-doc-technic...

roundabout-host32• 9 days ago

It used to say that, it was removed as a PR measure, while in practice the national implementations (as you do not use this app, but a national one) require it, because the specification only mandates Android/iOS versions to be provided (it allows others, but no government will do so), and it does not mandate them not to have "attestation".

Deukhoofd• 8 days ago

This entire issue is a disaster of a Github issue. It looks like its on the entirely wrong repository. I did eventually find the text in another repository; the one for the Android reference implementation: https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/av-app-android...

It was removed from there to clarify the entire "Hey, this application is not done yet"

It being in the reference implementation instead of the spec is a massive difference. One means that it's just there to show an example, and we should push national governments to do it better in their implementations, while the other would mean that it'd be a requirement for all implementations, which it doesn't appear to be.

It also looks like the reference implementation removed that functionality entirely several months ago: https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/av-app-android...

3abiton• 8 days ago

Honestly, root detection is a cat and mouse game. So many ways to spoof it. Same with Play Integrity. If the goal is to prevent bad actors, it will never work really. It will be just a big headache for the citizens. Look at how gatekeeping certain websites is working. VPNs became mainstream. So are proxies too especially for bad actors. Malicious actors have just to pay up a service to do so. And I am sure it will be the same with Android (it already is with keyboxes you can purchase to spoof play integrity)

a21282• 8 days ago

In my opinion the whole "it's just a reference and national govs can decide" is a nonsense excuse to diffuse blame in a circle. The only outcome is that national governments will closely follow the reference and reuse the decision, the citizens of each country then have to manually complain to their own government individually, at which point they might get ignored because, well the reference implementation has it or talks about it, so they're just following the recommended security requirements, and who are you anyway to be demanding our system get less secure are you some kind of cybercriminal?

Play Integrity is still recommended to be evaluated in the documentation, with no mentions of its consequences. https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/av-app-android...

cynicalsecurity• 9 days ago

Why the hell EU even needs an age verification app? Who's genius idea is this and what for?

christkv3• 8 days ago

Step one in the "EU Firewall" and future credit system. Step out of line and get debanked or other things they will come up with to keep you inline.

grg0• 8 days ago

Age verification is being pushed by US tech companies.

HelloUsername• 9 days ago

"EU age verification app to ban any Android system not licensed by Google" 27-jul-2025 https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyFromEU/comments/1mah79o/eu_age_v...

and

"EU age verification app not planning desktop support" 24-sep-2025 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45359074

g-b-r2• 9 days ago

What would this be applied to? Let's check the freshly printed report by the "Special Panel on child safety online and potential age restrictions for social media" (https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/d833504d-5ec3...).

We have a definition at the beginning, for "Social media and other digital services (in short, social media+)":

“Within the scope of this report, the terms ‘social media+’ and ‘social media and other digital services’, are used to broadly define services that may be available to minors and contain age-inappropriate and/or risky features (for example, addictive and harmful features, among which infinite scroll, autoplay, recommendation algorithms and persistent notifications) and/or content. Social media and other digital services providers include online platforms serving as intermediaries of content from third parties, such as social media, as well as app stores. AI systems posing risks to minors’ safety and development, including AI companions, video games exposing children to harmful commercial practices or dangerous contacts, and video-sharing platforms enabling age-inappropriate access to minors are also included.”

So, let's see, services that may contain age-inappropriate and/or risky content, "online platforms serving as intermediaries of content from third parties".

How quickly can you come up with something that wouldn't fall in that definition?

It seems that anything that allows user-contributed content (such as plain old forums) or communication among users would be comprised in it.

And, yes, to be sure we explicitly include app stores (I guess including e.g. F-Droid, and what about software repositories?) and video games with intercommunication features.

What is this definition used for?

Recommendation 1 of chapter 3: “A harmonised EU-wide access restriction to *social media and other digital services*, including AI companions, for children under 13 is necessary.”

This is a report, not law, but it was commissioned by Ursula von der Leyen and “The report is intended to inform future actions to be proposed by the European Commission and EU Member States to reinforce child safety online.”

sebastianconcpt• 9 days ago

The issue is not the issue, the issue is what their "solution" enables for expanding the surface that governments have for controlling details of how you live your life in the future once accepted.

ozlikethewizard• 9 days ago

This is even more than just android, I'm sure there are plenty of us using AOSP forks that do not have google services installed. I think the EU will overturn this with enough noise though. Hopefully the UK doesn't do the same, I've avoided having to root my phone so far and would like to keep it that way if possible.

zombot• 8 days ago

Doesn't that mean that Apple and Google are getting all that data about every single affected user?

roundabout-host32• 8 days ago

They are.

christkv3• 8 days ago

Tells us the us is some sort of failed democracy then implements China like access control for the population because they want to ensure they can prosecute you for wrong think in the future. Yeah Im loving this "liberal order" that looks more like good old facism dressed up to look "nice". Even how the passing of chat control was done has ensured I´m voting for any party that will dismantle the EU. EU Parliament is not a democratic of representative institution. Its about as legitimate and democratic as the Duma in Russia.

trallnag• 8 days ago

The EU skipped "having kids" and jumped directly to "protecting kids"

Cider9986• 8 days ago

Excellent point.

butz• 8 days ago

Your app should've been a website.

nullbio• 8 days ago

Fuck the globalists.

singingtoday• 8 days ago

I would never do this verification with my real face, and neither should anybody else. Kids get around this using video game character creators. You can too.

As a netizen it's your duty to avoid, oppose, and circumvent anything that forces you to use your real identity.

jasonvorhe2• 8 days ago

Don't use it. Don't even consider it. Do whatever it takes to let everyone know you're not gonna use this and tell your friends the same.

These corrupt bafoons talk of sovereignty and then they pull stunts like this. Even if you're totally pro EU, vote with your actions if you can't outvote the Commission.

fancyfredbot• 8 days ago

Buffoon (not bafoon).

jasonvorhe2• 7 days ago

Thanks, I really had no idea!

wobfan5• 8 days ago

I will try my best, but at some point I feel this won't help. 98% of people have no problem with this. In fact they probably even see this as a positive, finally they don't have to identify via these shitty video services from various call centers anymore, and even the children are perfectly safe now.

I am quite pessimistic. They couldn't care less about some 2% of people who just stop using their services.

roundabout-host32• 7 days ago

You are wrong. Maybe 2% aren't OK with it, but 98% of the 2% will still give in to avoid losing their "normality".

TacticalCoder• 8 days ago

European "age verification" "app" forcing everyone to use Android or iOS

As a european if I wanted to see the glass half-full I'd say: at least the good news is that from that headline we can name a gigantic loser... Microsoft.

duxup2• 8 days ago

The unintended consequence of poorly thought out regulations (good or bad) can be wild.

I’m still having to deal with making some sort of legal agreement with EVERY website I visit over cookies constantly… I just don’t care anymore / click whatever.

Nicholas_C• 8 days ago

I'm confused on why browsers can't automatically handle the cookies pop ups. It's beyond annoying and something that should just be automated since my preferences don't change.

duxup2• 8 days ago

It should be very easy. But for whatever reasons they chose to make this the people’s problem… constantly.

Same goes for age ID things too.

watwut4• 8 days ago

The companies strongly opposed such thing in browsers. That is why.

roundabout-host32• 8 days ago

Google started to lobby by using a dramatisation: "if it is easy to reject advertising cookies, the whole Web advertising industry will go extinct!"

lionkor• 8 days ago

Consentomatic does most common cookie dialogs, according to your settings.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-mat...

It also exists for other browsers.

I am not affiliated,but I have it on my devices and even on my phone, it's quite good and I very rarely get cookie popups now.

kobalsky• 8 days ago

then you have an extension with full access to everything.

unless it's one of the big guys, devs either sell the extensions or get hacked, it has happened multiple times.

stymaar• 8 days ago

I’m still having to deal with making some sort of legal agreement with EVERY website I visit over cookies constantly… I just don’t care anymore / click whatever.

That's the problem when you want to be pro-business while keeping the vague intent of protecting privacy.

They didn't mandate cookie banner, you can either not track or add a cookie banner. Of course businesses living off surveillance capitalism will chose the cookie banner. They could have banned tracking altogether, and chose not to because “it's bad for business”.

BoingBoomTschak2• 8 days ago

uBlock has lists you can enable for most of these.

eur0pa• 8 days ago

Not gonna use it, and if forced I’ll just retire from the internet. I’ve been around since 1996, it’s high time anyways.

consp• 8 days ago

I'm still wondering how this is compatible with laws concerning disabilities, the elderly and those with certain religious believes. They already keep everything governmental related multi modal (you must be able to do it some other way, and almost always this include by proxy and on paper). This is some Draconian way of doing it.

0xbadcafebee• 8 days ago

Guys, you don't understand, their hands are tied! They need to make the children safe from seeing boobies by forcing mass surveillance on everyone (despite the fact that children can trivially get around it)... and to force mass surveillance on everyone, they need to capitulate to American tech companies. It's unfortunate, but you'll just have to give up your privacy.

sunaookami• 8 days ago

Fuck everyone supporting this surveillance "app", everyone helping implementing this should be ashamed. Thanks for turning the EU into a dictatorship.

CircuitSeuss2• 8 days ago

What if… we all just agree age verification is bad for everyone and move on?

greatgib• 3 days ago

We should remember the name of the rats that are working on this thing to ensure to never hire them or block them from everything we can for being the proud killer of our freedom in Europe...

European "age verification" "app" forcing everyone to use Android or iOS

Related Stories