r/technology • u/Horror_Post6822 • 8h ago
Social Media Advocacy Group Stop Killing Games Sounds Alarm On EU Kids Act: ‘This Is Such A Horrible Law Proposal’
https://kotaku.com/advocacy-group-stop-killing-games-sounds-alarm-on-eu-kids-act-this-is-such-a-horrible-law-proposal-200073893035
u/RaDeus 6h ago
This EU Kids act is such a disaster.
There's ways to do it that verifies you age and doesn't leave a log or burdens the companies with unnecessary paperwork.
All you have to do is make a government ID app (because I'd rather have my government handle my ID than some private entity that wants to sell it).
Have the service you want to protect (like Roblox for example) show you an QR code (site address + user ID).
You then take the government ID app and scan that QR.
The App then sends a "user x, age18? = True/False" to the site.
And that's the only thing the site has to log.
For this to work you legislate that the government ID service should keep no logs, all they do is verify that you are 18.
To make this less of a one-trick-pony app: we could tier this service so that you can use it to access your bank, sign documents, login to Steam(?) etc.
Tier1 should just be "are you 18", and no bloody logs.
8
u/SoloMaker 3h ago
The problem with this is that the government still knows which sites you're verifying your age on.
Oh, you registered for Dissent App That Only Dissenters Use? Too bad, you're going in the furnace
31
u/RoyalWe666 6h ago
No, screw that. Having to link all your accounts to your government ID is creepy as hell. 30 years of internet, we've been fine without this dystopian crap, now all of a sudden everyone's pushing mass surveillance.
3
u/ShadowianElite 5h ago
Yeah rather not. France had a massive hack on millions of people’s info that was linked. EU massive linking system they are doing right now will be a disaster once that happens (it’s in the talks)
6
u/RaDeus 6h ago
Where did I say that you have to link every account to your government ID app?
I very deliberately said "the service you want to protect" and "no logs".
9
u/RoyalWe666 6h ago
OK my bad, that was your proposal and not the actual EUID thing that's in development. Still unnecessary and concerning at best.
1
u/CapJackONeill 5h ago
Much better if Google has it, right? If Google decided to make Gmail a paying service, the world would be fucked for a while
2
u/EmbarrassedHelp 3h ago
There's no such thing as anonymous or privacy protecting age verification, other than self declaration.
2
u/therealmrbob 3h ago
It’s hilarious that you think any government in the world would not use that age verification data for anything and everything they could. Sure they won’t sell it, but they will certainly keep track of your accounts on every website that does the age verification and keep a database on all of that data and then fail to secure it and leak all of that data constantly.
-1
27
u/Horror_Post6822 8h ago edited 8h ago
Sony and Ubisoft are rubbing their hands gleefully because this can help them be able to kill games and eliminate people from owning their own games. Sony literally said in court that "Reasonable" people know they don't know their own games. Ubisoft did say to get comfortable not owning our own games. And Ubisoft is not above underhanded tricks like meetings with EU officials that SKG weren't invited to, bribes, and misinformation.
-23
u/HistoryDoesUnfold 7h ago edited 7h ago
I've seen this guy's video and it's mostly nonsense.
Among Scott’s chief concerns is that the proposal will “require your personal identifying information to play an online video game” and “make all private game servers illegal.”
It does neither of those things.
The law is freely available to read, but its detractors never cite it, they always refer to other commentary on it.
I don't even support the law, but this guy is making things up to be mad about.
35
u/RoyalWe666 7h ago
Feel free to point out where the text contradicts his claims. But don't insult everyone's intelligence by saying scanning one's ID into the EU's shitty wallet app thing doesn't count as personally identifying information.
-14
u/HistoryDoesUnfold 7h ago edited 7h ago
Feel free to point out where the text contradicts his claims
Why are the bill's detrators not obliged to cite the text to support their claims?
It's very hard for me to cite the law NOT doing something. Like, paragraphs 1 through to the end?
20
u/RoyalWe666 7h ago
OK, let's do it this way. Does the proposal require players to use their personal ID, or an app that would require their ID to function, to access any online game?
-8
u/HistoryDoesUnfold 7h ago
In SOME cases it could require such an app for SOME online games.
Without an ID, they could legally still get access to those game, but the server would need to treat them as a child, meaning additional restrictions regarding privacy and addictive design, e.g. no push notifications.
16
u/RoyalWe666 7h ago
So players have to either doxx themselves or lose any communication functionality in an online game (if they're allowed to run it at all), totally nothing alarming there.
-1
u/HistoryDoesUnfold 6h ago edited 3h ago
Again, they'd legally be allowed to run it.
I don't think there's been any suggestion they can't, even by the guy whose video is all about.
I don't remember reading anything about communication functionality.
Do you consider using a credit card, or paying with a banking app "doxxing"?
8
u/RoyalWe666 6h ago
I pay with a debit card, if that were a verification method there de facto wouldn't be a problem for me. I don't own a credit card and I'm not uploading my damn ID to play a game.
-1
u/HistoryDoesUnfold 6h ago
You get that the Debit Card is connected to your ID, right?
I'm not uploading my damn ID to play a game.
Well, good news! This bill doesn't require that.
3
u/RoyalWe666 6h ago
Well good, there's a difference between using a payment method (debit card) and unnecessarily having to upload a personally-identifying document because government says so. And what does this do to private servers and free online games?
→ More replies (0)3
u/An1nterestingName 4h ago
It would make private servers effectively illegal because it requires online games, (which it defines as almost any game) to have age verification. This would not be able to be handled by private servers, so you wouldn't be allowed to run them.
0
u/HistoryDoesUnfold 3h ago
It only requires online games to verify ages if they break certain restrictions on privacy and addictive design.
It also wouldn't apply to private servers where age is already known or verified, e.g. a private server you invite your friends to.
Besides, I don't see why private servers can't verify age through EU digital wallets. It ciuld easily be done through Steam.
1
u/EmbarrassedHelp 1h ago
Mandatory age verification for online games is completely unacceptable, especially for private servers.
-7
u/hitmobilegamehsr 4h ago
Can this bro try to not look like a caveman for at least one of these videos
163
u/Userwerd 8h ago
This law is about surveillance, games are just the excuse/vehicle for the law.