I'm reluctant to verify my identity or age for any online services

I'm the sort of person that either rejects the cookies, or will use another site entirely to avoid some weird dark-pattern cookie trickery. I don't like the idea of any particular service getting more information than they should.

Siting there I realized, we were not the real target. It is the young people that are growing up conditioned to press accept, enter any details asked of them, and to not value their personal data. Sadly, the damage is already done.

The notion that you should upload a passport to random sites for age verification is unbelievably dangerous. That's a recipe for identity theft. And face scanning is also an invasion of privacy, not to mention very unreliable (my 16 year old son has apparently been accepted as 20 years old).

I've pointed out in many places already that the only way to do online age verification right, is for the government to provide an e-ID that the random site will direct you to with the question "is this person older than X?", then you log in to the e-ID site, which informs you exactly what the site wants to know (which should be as rough as possible; no birthdate), then the e-ID site directs you back to your original site (or possibly through a proxy, if you don't want the government to know what sites you visit), and calls their webhook (through a proxy) with the confirmation of your age.

That's also how my online payments work, and this should be the standard pattern for everything that needs to be secure. Not sharing sensitive or personal data with random sites.

I can't think of a single other use case in which I'd be willing to verify my identity. I'd rather go back to hosting email myself, and am fine with circumventing content access control for all other platforms for personal use.

We're seeing the world slide towards authoritarian strongmen, and we want to give them a massive index of who we are and what we do? I'd rather not.

The decline of privacy, the increase in intrusive government surveillance, the increasing restrictions on free speech - this is all part of a very disturbing pattern. Our governments are becoming increasingly authoritarian, and these are the tools they use to keep the populace under control.

Kids are trying to access XYZ which isn't safe (where XYZ may as well be "the internet") -> verify the ages of all adults, because we can't verify the age of a kid.

Meanwhile kids, like adults, can just find another route to access what they want. So some subset of adults hands over their identity information to an untrustworthy third party of dubious security.

I can't see how that does anything other than make the situation worse.

There isnt a single identity. Theres a loose federation of databases (banks, CRAs, telecoms, electoral roll, etc.).

There are multiple operational definitions of "name": legal name, common name, known-as name, card name, account display name. None is universally canonical. Theres no statutory hierarchy that forces institutions to agree on precedence.

In the absence of a mandatory national ID, identification relies on matching across name, date of birth, and address history, which are inconsistently collected. Fuzziness is necessary for coverage, but it introduces brittleness. If a variant isnt explicitly linked as an alias, automated online checks can fail because the matching rules dont explore every permutation.

Even within a single dataset the problem doesnt disappear. Large systems such as the NHS have documented identification errors involving patients with identical names, twins at the same address, or demographic overlaps. Unique identifiers help, but operational workflows still depend on humans entering and reconciling imperfect data.

https://digital.nhs.uk/services/personal-demographics-servic...

So, it's good to remember the leanings of people like the author, but it's perhaps more important to remember the extent to which this is a collective issue.

I never trusted 23 and me. But my Dad did, so now I potentially have a problem. Reminded of another anecdote about a guy who did everything to not use is social security number for ID for ANYTHING. Then someone pointed out -- it doesn't matter, they have everyone elses, so yours is the missing one.

Policy and skin-in-the-game for the COLLECTORS of the info is the thing to focus on.

The UK government has approved 7 age verification methods. Not one of them meets that standard.

That's not an accident.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/protecting-children/a...

I do not hesitate to drop a domain that acts suspicious into uBlock Origin -> My Filters:

    ||somedomain.tld$

> And… the answer is “none”.

> At least, none that I can think of at the moment.

Think back to the recent pandemic.

Work? Online. School? Online. Recreational activities? Online. Talking to loved ones you don’t live with? Online. Birthday party? Online. Nonfood shopping? Online. Banking? Paying taxes and bills? Online. Job interview? Doctors appointment? Online. Dating? You guessed it, online.

The internet’s a big thing these days.

I don't buy for a second that any of this has to do with "age verification".

This is 100% an attempt to increase surveillance of the population. It is not an isolated step but part of a cohesive unit - YOU are the data. And private entities want the data. That includes the state; many states are de-facto led like a corporation (not all states, by the way, but many - most definitely the USA right now).

This is possible today with complete privacy for people with biometric IDs and biometric passports (ie most passports, EU IDs, Aadhaar IDs, and more) using a service like self.xyz

It's honestly a reason why I don't use the service.

Though I can't take credit for the idea. It was proposed by the European Democratic Party.[0]

[0] https://democrats.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Protecting-C...

Weigh that against the value of using the service. A lot of times that will still probably come out in favor of using the service. Sometimes, especially given the kind of services that want age verification, the potential cost is such that you would be insane to verify.

The author here seems to be commenting specifically on the type of anonymity-breaking age assurance widely being utilized along with the vaguely justified social media bans. Given the right technology to prove an age threshold but while preserving anonymity I'd be curious how their thoughts would change.

For example, we've never seen people critiquing the naive kind of 'Are you over 18?' prompts seen on ye olde Reddit or adult sites, precisely because those weren't breaking anonymity or leaking any trackable identifiers.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47229953

Really annoyed a company can ask this of children without parental consent.

It's roughly the same age as mine, but if someone tried to pass themselves off as me with that birthdate, they wouldn't succeed.

These companies are mostly just verifying I'm an adult anyway, and I am legit that.

But yeah, I don't like just giving the actual date everywhere as it can potentially be used for identity theft.

All this is to facilitate that lifestyle without any concerns that far more damage is likely to happen by allowing it to happen than insisting on adequate parenting

Banking, taxes, treasurydirect, linkedin, docusign, online filing,

Right now all those are tied to my gmail account.

So I'm feeding google all this juicy (IMO) confidential information. What happens when I get locked out by google's automatic systems? I already lost my first gmail account from like 2003, when you had to get an invite to sign up. I'm stuck in a verification loop that emails a yahoo email that no longer exists. Impossible to get a real person to look at it.

If I can just verify that I am who I say I am without an email account... That'd be worth it. Of course that just shifts the burden to the identity verification company rather than an email company.

But verifying my age? I see no purpose other than a backdoor for mass identity verification. keeping lists of people and what they're accessing. Buying alcohol online still requires the person accepting the package to be over 21. Buying firearms online still requires being shipped to an FFL.

I already despise how much information my ISP has about what I see, what I access, and when.

As a parent, I'd like to point out that the threat I care about is not "my kid of age N talks to a sicko of age M, where M - N > P for some legislatively-prescribed value of P".

The threat is "my kid of age N talks to or can be observed by a sicko".

These age verification schemes do nothing to help against that. Also, the worst predators online are often the vendors providing "kid friendly" services.

On top of that, these laws are being pushed hardest by the worst of the most corrupt politicians on earth. Why would I install a webcam on my kid's machine because that group of people wants me to?!?

Maybe we should focus on prosecuting the backlog of stuff in the Epstein files pertaining to politicians pushing these age verification services, not let anyone (except parents) control how kids access stuff online.

Some company or, hell, the gov't setup a proxy service that whitelists the internet and have your kid use that. Do your fucking job.

It's not some SV-backed startup. It's not Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon or Meta. It's the government.

What I think must result is, a monotonic cultural erosion and deprecation of such platforms and regions implementing those restrictions, and continuous replacement with engineered and packaged foreign imports from venues and regions from psychological "upstream" where there aren't such restrictions. But I guess that's what they explicitly desire.

In general, a social security number is extremely sensitive, and should never be shared outside your home country tax system.

Verification is indeed a perverse invasion of privacy, and a liability to those with financial holdings. I guess the credit-lock service is now a must to deal with the circus that is modern logistics. =3

Offline there is a reason for that, online are enough countries where it breaks the law if you sell without verification at least for NC-17 titles

I'm punching myself in the balls one way or another.

But then I remembered the game 20 questions, and how few yes/no questions you need to guess pretty much any concept.

I am no longer willing to share anything, not even a yes/no question.

What else is there to say?

Any such verification service will either sell your data or lose it. Will not may.

France has an ID service to pay taxes, and they have a network of possible ID verification systems. Like, you can ID through the tax system, or through the healthcare system. It works fine.

Implementing an API that uses the same to provide age verification is not rocket science.

If you need age verification for a website, say "smedia.fr", then you go there, then it makes you get an age verification token to "franceid.gov.fr", that guy gives you back a token, you send the token to smedia.fr which checks the token with franceid.gov.fr

I don't understand how this is even an issue.

1 - 1 - 1970 is always mine - Unix zero

If none, you were born on March 5, 1957.

(Note on evaluating this: there are some circumstances where the penalty changes later. I know one person who's Global Access paperwork was delayed because they lied to their airline's frequent flyer program about their age. But that was the whole consequence: a need to update their data with the airline).

Pretty much sums up all modern discourse in banning social media and doing age checks. When I was growing up it was satanic symbols in the music I listened to.

I guess - wtf is wrong with adults? Why do they feel compelled to control the younger generation?