On-device face scans and cross-platform age keys decrease privacy risks, but trust issues abound.
See full article...
See full article...
After Discord fiasco, age-check tech promises privacy by running locally. Does it work?
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Service employs age verification -> I stop using it. Simple. If Windows starts using OS-level age gating, that will be the kick I need to fully migrate to Linux on desktop, and drop any program I can't get to work with Wine/Lutris/Steam/etc. (If Linux gets forced to use this sort of tech, then I can just patch out that functionality or find a distro that doesn't insist on using it.)
If Discord employs age-gating at scale, the first time I get prompted, I stop using it, and I tell my D&D group that we're either switching to a new voice platform or I'm out. And to put my money where my mouth is: the first time that any site like Ars or Reddit tries to pull this shit, I'm leaving. There's no way that I'm going to cooperate with this sort of idiocy.
If I have to get dragged kicking and screaming into this new hellscape, then I'll just be as obstinate as humanly possible, or I'll just go buy a cabin in the woods and only talk to people via Meshtastic.
If Discord employs age-gating at scale, the first time I get prompted, I stop using it, and I tell my D&D group that we're either switching to a new voice platform or I'm out. And to put my money where my mouth is: the first time that any site like Ars or Reddit tries to pull this shit, I'm leaving. There's no way that I'm going to cooperate with this sort of idiocy.
If I have to get dragged kicking and screaming into this new hellscape, then I'll just be as obstinate as humanly possible, or I'll just go buy a cabin in the woods and only talk to people via Meshtastic.
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
XSportSeeker
Ars Scholae Palatinae
Privacy and potential for leaks is not the only issue with age verification, and the sooner people get this, the sooner people will realize that it's not worth engaging in any discussion around this. Same for AI and stuff like AI equipped cameras, same for ICE, same for massive sovereignty violations, same for bombing schools and hospitals.
The solution for the problem is rejecting it altogether. Reject all platforms that asks for positive ID for age verification purposes, reject all businesses and corporations dwelling on how to do it, reject all promises of doing it in a "private manner", period.
In a similar manner that the only winning move is not to play.
Age gating via positive ID is entirely a play to collect more user info, and the entire political campaign towards this has been funded by Big Tech with vested interests in escaping liability, and collecting private user data. Let me reinforce this point - Big Tech is funding the push towards making everyone else but themselves responsible for verifying age, for their own purposes. This is not about protecting children, as most legislation that targets this often is not - this is a play on liability and profit for the monopolistic corporations that control America today.
This is happening along with the realization that social media as it has grown today is the source of most major issues we have globally today. It is among several desperate measures to retain status quo, and avoid liability and responsibility for the evils they knowingly and willingly brought upon societies worldwide. It is because people are finally collectively realizing the damages American Big Tech has done globally, that they are trying everything to avoid responsibility.
So, above all that - this is about balance of power, about erosion of fundamental pillars in democracy, and about fundamental human rights. For the profit of a few, as per usual.
You don't need to worry, discuss, and argue about the details on how the meat is processed, because the problem is the meat being processed - not how it'll be done.
Forcing everyone to show positive ID to prove they are not kids, is not democracy - it's totalitarianism. It's what famously happens in totalitarian dictatorships, like the Nazi regime - papers, please. It is guilty until proven innocent by an unreliable and unverifiable opaque system, which means it's mostly guilty even when proven not guilty, with the penalty being endless exploitation and brainwashing or radicalization.
Now, countries like the US already ignored the encroachment of late-stage capitalism systems that led to the neo-fascist state that it's currently going through. It ignored radical hate-based populist propaganda to put representatives in power that are setting US geopolitics back centuries in a global context. It ignored it's own set of anti-trust laws to protect the population from monopolistic, cartel-style and criminal mob and abuses, and let a parallel shady economy of mass private data collection and selling to happen. It is on a constant stream of unbalanced de-regulatory and criminal manipulation of information to favor enterprises that politically align themselves with the current administration to put profit above public safety and public interests. It has let criminal, anti-democratic, scammy and scummy, grift mercenary based political system to take over all of the branches of government and rule the country like a despotic kingdom - in executive, legislative, judiciary and press.
So, given all of this and much more - relegating and accepting that age-gating is "inevitable" is yet another step towards surrendering your private and individual citizen rights and power of choice towards a project for power mounted by profit above all else private corporation schemes, and project for power by a neo-fascist regime.
If you still care about democratic values and what the US was build on historically, you do not need to go into discussions on the details of how this will be done. This should be a direct rejection. Do not waste time looking into how these companies are promising to do it - the fact that they are offering to do it is already wrong by itself. The how does not matter here, only the why.
The solution for the problem is rejecting it altogether. Reject all platforms that asks for positive ID for age verification purposes, reject all businesses and corporations dwelling on how to do it, reject all promises of doing it in a "private manner", period.
In a similar manner that the only winning move is not to play.
Age gating via positive ID is entirely a play to collect more user info, and the entire political campaign towards this has been funded by Big Tech with vested interests in escaping liability, and collecting private user data. Let me reinforce this point - Big Tech is funding the push towards making everyone else but themselves responsible for verifying age, for their own purposes. This is not about protecting children, as most legislation that targets this often is not - this is a play on liability and profit for the monopolistic corporations that control America today.
This is happening along with the realization that social media as it has grown today is the source of most major issues we have globally today. It is among several desperate measures to retain status quo, and avoid liability and responsibility for the evils they knowingly and willingly brought upon societies worldwide. It is because people are finally collectively realizing the damages American Big Tech has done globally, that they are trying everything to avoid responsibility.
So, above all that - this is about balance of power, about erosion of fundamental pillars in democracy, and about fundamental human rights. For the profit of a few, as per usual.
You don't need to worry, discuss, and argue about the details on how the meat is processed, because the problem is the meat being processed - not how it'll be done.
Forcing everyone to show positive ID to prove they are not kids, is not democracy - it's totalitarianism. It's what famously happens in totalitarian dictatorships, like the Nazi regime - papers, please. It is guilty until proven innocent by an unreliable and unverifiable opaque system, which means it's mostly guilty even when proven not guilty, with the penalty being endless exploitation and brainwashing or radicalization.
Now, countries like the US already ignored the encroachment of late-stage capitalism systems that led to the neo-fascist state that it's currently going through. It ignored radical hate-based populist propaganda to put representatives in power that are setting US geopolitics back centuries in a global context. It ignored it's own set of anti-trust laws to protect the population from monopolistic, cartel-style and criminal mob and abuses, and let a parallel shady economy of mass private data collection and selling to happen. It is on a constant stream of unbalanced de-regulatory and criminal manipulation of information to favor enterprises that politically align themselves with the current administration to put profit above public safety and public interests. It has let criminal, anti-democratic, scammy and scummy, grift mercenary based political system to take over all of the branches of government and rule the country like a despotic kingdom - in executive, legislative, judiciary and press.
So, given all of this and much more - relegating and accepting that age-gating is "inevitable" is yet another step towards surrendering your private and individual citizen rights and power of choice towards a project for power mounted by profit above all else private corporation schemes, and project for power by a neo-fascist regime.
If you still care about democratic values and what the US was build on historically, you do not need to go into discussions on the details of how this will be done. This should be a direct rejection. Do not waste time looking into how these companies are promising to do it - the fact that they are offering to do it is already wrong by itself. The how does not matter here, only the why.
Upvote
14
(16
/
-2)
Nothing in this article, these comments, or any other discussion about the topic would prevent someone from looking out to make a bomb or make anonymous threats on the Internet. Those people will simply refuse to cooperate with any of the systems people are talking about putting in place.
To borrow your "good ol' days" analogy: This is about making people walk around with their ID printed on their shirt. And anybody could keep track of who entered a library. Or an abortion clinic. Or a liquor store. Or into a campaign office to volunteer. Or a cancer treatment center. Or an LGBTQ+ book store. Or a gun shop. Or an AA meeting. Or a tobacco shop. Or a specific flavor of church/synagogue/mosque. Or a domestic violence shelter. Or any of the other places you took for granted that you were just some random person in public and couldn't be tied to your identity or correlated.
And the people who want to do harm in those places, or any other, are simply going to walk around with fake IDs on their shirt isntead of following the rules.
The fundamental flaw in your reasoning is that these systems will work and that bad actors will go along with them.
Upvote
19
(19
/
0)
Bazzite is working normally, as it is Arch. There is a variant of Arch, Arch32 that blocked itself from Brazil. There is also a Bsd variant, MidnightBSD, that is showing messages that they will never be able to comply with the new regulation on Brazil, but the access is ok.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Sypher the 297th
Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
The corporate-Christian alliance has been trying to recreate the last true fusion of their ideologies since the 70s: Nazi Germany.
The rubes have been convinced by their bought and paid for preachers that the left hates freedom, are pdfs, and are the elites taking all their jobs so they can be given to illegal immigrants and shipped to the countries where all the brown people come from. Ironically, every accusation is a confession with these people.
Trump has his brown shirts in ICE and every local police force. They're spying on us at unprecedented levels to the point Trump threw a temper tantrum because Anthropic wouldn't allow their tech to be used in warrantless mass surveillance. . . or that could just be the excuse they came out with because he filled his diaper and needed a cover. Who can say?
Hopefully the sane, non-Christofascists in the US wake up soon and realize its simpler to try and hang a lot of Nazis now than to try and hang just a few of them after they've started a war that kills hundreds of millions on the low end and probably nuked the moon because it was the true cause of increased flooding and exteeme weather all along or something stupid (if we're lucky and they don't nuke China for refusing to pay tarrifs or just say Trump is the manliest president).
Neither option is great but one is definitely preferable.
The rubes have been convinced by their bought and paid for preachers that the left hates freedom, are pdfs, and are the elites taking all their jobs so they can be given to illegal immigrants and shipped to the countries where all the brown people come from. Ironically, every accusation is a confession with these people.
Trump has his brown shirts in ICE and every local police force. They're spying on us at unprecedented levels to the point Trump threw a temper tantrum because Anthropic wouldn't allow their tech to be used in warrantless mass surveillance. . . or that could just be the excuse they came out with because he filled his diaper and needed a cover. Who can say?
Hopefully the sane, non-Christofascists in the US wake up soon and realize its simpler to try and hang a lot of Nazis now than to try and hang just a few of them after they've started a war that kills hundreds of millions on the low end and probably nuked the moon because it was the true cause of increased flooding and exteeme weather all along or something stupid (if we're lucky and they don't nuke China for refusing to pay tarrifs or just say Trump is the manliest president).
Neither option is great but one is definitely preferable.
Upvote
-2
(2
/
-4)
I want to back this up. Used to work in primarily low-income schools. As in 90-97% free and reduced lunch. I worked with a lot of kids who had siblings and single mothers that worked multiple jobs just to keep a roof over their heads and some food on the table. A lot of kids barely see their parent or parents. Or guardians.
It does suck and it's bad for the kids. And it's bad for the adults. And you can rewind as far as you want to say "you shouldn't have had kids then" but that doesn't fix a thing. "Shouldn't have" isn't a workable solution. We have layer after layer of systemic problem that does make parenting and supervision really, really hard. Universal childcare and healthcare would go a long way towards fixing that.
But ultimately, this is the system working as intended to keep the underclass on that edge of precarity. And I get very frustrated with people who should have the context and knowledge to know better continuing to believe it's just a matter of bad parenting.
Upvote
11
(12
/
-1)
The worst part is that this monstrous invasion of privacy isn't even effective anymore, if it ever was.
AI-created videos can take any input, and plans like this create the video data needed for modification.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
The blueprint is too vague. Things like "the link between user and proof provider is cut" without reference to how it would be implemented are wishes, not design.
https://ageverification.dev/av-doc-...tic-source-and-attestation-provider-interface is much more helpful. Thanks for that last link.
The EU solution always starts with a link to your identity. That seems like a disadvantage vs Privately, which might use on-device biometrics that don't require any ID per se.
On the plus side, the Proof of Age attestation is single-use, so that prevents it from being used to link identities across multiple services. (Which is forbidden by policy, but single use means it's actually impossible which is much more important.) However, it expires after 3 months. So you need to go back to your identity-verifying app (that depends on your actual identity and not merely age) every three months. Rather than assuming that, once you have reached age 18+, you will continue to be age 18+ for the rest of your life.
I agree that it would have been helpful to include some discussion of this approach in the article though.
Upvote
10
(10
/
0)
I can imagine that. I can also imagine technology not working as intended, as that has already happened. I can also imagine an app infected with malware because the computer on which it was written is infected. This Happened to Apple once with an OS distribution. I can imagine a man in the middle attack in which the data, whatever it is, is changed in transit. And I read 1984 and can imagine a police state that uses such technology to keep an eye on political opponents. In fact, ICE is pushing for that technology right now.
I don't trust any third party to keep my information secure, much less trust the government to keep their fingers out. This is already a problem with VPNs as the FBI demands unlimited access to all user data for systems based in the US. Supposedly, this requires a warrant, but we've already seen this administration sidestepping that requirement by trying to treat an administrative warrant issued by the same agency that wants access as equivalent to a bench warrant issued by a judge. Even with judges involved, there are FISA warrants that are all but impossible to not get approved.
The US has long had an inclination toward police state practices, and the biggest steps in that direction are almost always justified as "for the children."
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
This is far the best take in this comment section thus far and worth reading in full.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Upvote
-4
(5
/
-9)
Many of the recent laws seem to be saying that age verification needs to be part of the OS installation/setup...not just for accessing content though.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Some laws though seem to want the age checks baked into the OS setup and don't seem to consider whether or not its connected to anything else
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
My first thought as well. The older I get, the less I seem to use as it is. The only two servies that I'd really miss would be Audible and Steam, so hopefully neither of those will require this bullshit.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Disagreement:
The Internet is an inherent part of society nowadays. Teaching children early on how to use the Internet in a safe manner is important. However, parental guidance should be maintained when younger, and check-ins and monitoring should be always expected and anticipated. It should be on the parents rather than software or external sources to control where, when, and how their children access it.
Upvote
10
(11
/
-1)
I just find myself using tech - especially social media - less and less these days. I communicate directly with friends, work on my personal life and seek out more in-person community. I’ve been phasing out smart home stuff, especially cameras and microphones. It’s just not fun or helpful anymore
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
I created an account just to like this comment. It's important to not give the people trying to erode an inalienable right even a single inch.
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
Nobody should be anonymous on the internet.
Because of this we have the Donald's and his pals elected.
Americans have this irrational fear of the "government surveillance" and fear nothing about many real issues.
Because of this we have the Donald's and his pals elected.
Americans have this irrational fear of the "government surveillance" and fear nothing about many real issues.
Upvote
-18
(2
/
-20)
Not out transgender people who want to go online under a name that isn't their dead name.
People with unusual names who are basically doxxing themselves.
People with a legitimate fear their criticism of their government might lead to them being arrested.
Upvote
12
(14
/
-2)
Anonymous access to the internet is not an inalienable right.
Upvote
-17
(3
/
-20)
Is this actually true?
I understand why we might want it to be, and how it sounds good. But I'm not really convinced it's some undisputed truth in our modern age. It feels a lot more complicated. Yes, even with repressive governments and people selling your info.
I would point to what happened to Twitter as an example to at least consider. Before Elon Musk fucked it all up, the blue check system was actually a pretty useful thing. Not perfect, but pretty good. You had a reasonable sense that a blue check tweet you saw came from an identifiable person.
Then Musk bought it, dismantled the system, and created a new one where fake identities and being anonymous were king. And grifters immediately took advantage to sew confusion, FUD, misinformation, and scams.
And it's only gotten worse as AI has become probably the majority of content posted now.
I think you could probably make an argument that having to prove you're a real person and not a chat bot (or a state actor or foreign scammer pretending to be a citizen) might actually improve democracy, and that without that it's probably in more danger than ever before.
I think the Trumps and Musks of the world want an anonymously trolling Internet. It's better for them. Anonymity doesn't protect us from their manipulations, it shields them.
I'm not suggesting there are easy answers. But I think statements like "the anonymous internet is more important for democracy than the printing press" are too glib and pat.
Upvote
12
(13
/
-1)
"the agency found that the mean age it produced was accurate to within 1.94 years."
So what exactly does that mean? Is that the mean absolute error? Mean squared error? The absolute value of the error between the means of the predicted and true groups? For 20 year olds, what percentage of them are going to be regularly mis-identified as under 18? Whichever the precise meaning of "1.94", it would suggest that as many as half of 20-year-olds will be regularly banned from 18+ websites, and presumably millions of people in their 20s will regularly be banned from all adult websites.
So what exactly does that mean? Is that the mean absolute error? Mean squared error? The absolute value of the error between the means of the predicted and true groups? For 20 year olds, what percentage of them are going to be regularly mis-identified as under 18? Whichever the precise meaning of "1.94", it would suggest that as many as half of 20-year-olds will be regularly banned from 18+ websites, and presumably millions of people in their 20s will regularly be banned from all adult websites.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
If only it was that simple. From the article:
Conducting a broader privacy analysis of all of Yoti’s age check options, Minocha’s team, working under assistant professor Michael Specter, concluded that Yoti “collects significant private information beyond what is strictly necessary to verify age” and that it “relies on sharing sensitive user information with several less user-visible fourth parties.”
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
It's not about the 1st Amendment getting violated Supreme Court! It's about the 4th!
Japan has been verifying age at the phone account level since 2007. It's up to the parent to not buy their kids GTA VI, or let them watch R or NC-17 movies, or not buy them vapes/cigarettes, or let them tote guns around under the legal age. It's about actually parenting and not using the decades old "save the children" excuse to make all of the U.S.(or the world) worse and more difficult!
What a Brave New World we live in!
This right here. Since when has it been normal to give your child an open tablet or cell phone with data access then brush them away to leave you alone. It's biting the parents in the ass now and affecting all the other innocent people in the world. Thanks you shitheads.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
An on-device "evil bit" for under18s is amazingly simple and adult websites would GLADLY obey it.
Except we keeping hearing that one checkbox is simply too much for parents. Fine, it'll be opt-out, the default when people throw a paycheck on a kid's phone (still CBA to check a box though~) is it'll be enabled, the onerous checkbox burden will be the wall stopping you from big boy youtube.
You're right, it's so trivially solved. Unless, of course, this whole drama had ulterior motives the whole time and Think Of The Children was (inhale to allow for gasps) a bunch of bullshit.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
Very, very few people are teaching their kids how to use the internet safely. Yes, it 'should' be getting done. It's not. We need to recognize the reality of the world we live in, not the one we think we should be living in.
Upvote
2
(4
/
-2)
I use a fingerprint to log into my machine, access my password manager etc. No information leaves my device.
Perhaps the solution is for web sites to advertise "age restrictions" and the finger print reader based on local use ID data just sends a "yes" to gain access.
Parents set up IDs for their kids, so parental control is involved to control what their kids can see/do.... which is the argument that is made "what about the parents"
Not all sites will need age restrictions, ones that have real/strong moderation policies and practices may get exempt. I use such a forum and peoples posts / access to certain areas / and even their accounts can and do get removed.
Nothing is perfect, but doing nothing is guaranteed failure.
No law is perfect, if we got rid of all laws that are "Easy to get around" then we would have no laws.
Social media is the cause of so many societal issues its not funny, they rake in the billions, pay sod all taxes, then leave the harm for tax payers to fix.
I am old enough to remember when the ban on smoking on aircraft was introduced, "Airlines will fail"...they didn't.
Smoke free bars & restaurants "They will go broke", they didn't in fact many had improved patronage because non-smokers started going to their business which they had previously avoided.
Kids have ONE chance to grow up, and teaching kids about critical thinking takes a LONG time, roughly by the time they are 16 or so, though science says the brain is not fully developed until 20-30.
Having kids getting dopamine hits as they grow up and their brain is developing is a "legal drug addiction". Social media is fully aware of this, just like tobacco was aware of the cancer risks and addiction.
Remember these screwed up kids will be in control of YOUR retirement.
WHEN (not if) age verification comes in, then and only then will technological solutions be found, and they will be found because there is a need.
Upvote
1
(4
/
-3)
50% of parents are below average as parents
50% of parents are below average tech wise
LOTS of parents are working multiple jobs and are tired.
Kids are no capable of understanding many concepts until they are in their mid teens , eg critical thinking, and USA proves that a huge swath of adults are incapable of critical thinking too. "Abortions after the baby is born" comes to mind....
Upvote
6
(7
/
-1)
They want to protect the children while they let predators roam free on sites where there are children like Minecraft and Roblox. Ryan Montgomery went on Shaun Ryan last November and showed it
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X51d06g4tuk
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X51d06g4tuk
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Agree. The title of this piece is weird, like Ars want it to happen, better ad targeting maybe, or just clickbait?
There have been many ideas like this over the years, but a lot of "ifs" between those and embrace by govt, the public and the rest of tech. And a lot of people hate this one. Good luck with that.
Upvote
2
(3
/
-1)
That's probably true most of the time, but in just the past twelve months I've helped or seen about six people start using Linux that hadn't before, mostly driven by the Windows 11 switch over. They've downloaded the ISO, put it on a USB stick and installed the OS. They obviously have enough knowledge to try out different distributions merely by going to websites.
None of them are comfortable on the command line nor do they understand networking in general. They don't have to. Most Linux distributions these days are that easy to install and use. So blocking Linux distributions probably will have an effect. How big? I don't know.
(Standard disclaimers about anecdotes and data apply)
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
You can shout "no no no" all day long and it will still happen so it might be better to know how it works especially when you hate it and how its implemented.
This isnt just an idea but something thats already implemented in some countries and US States, btw, its not an if anymore by a long shot.
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
It might be coming, but doesn't have to be accepted.
I will absolutely vote with my eyeballs, and the first time I'm age checked on something, I'll drop that site like a hot rock.
Nothing is so utterly necessary from a single source on the internet I can't take my habits elsewhere.
I will absolutely vote with my eyeballs, and the first time I'm age checked on something, I'll drop that site like a hot rock.
Nothing is so utterly necessary from a single source on the internet I can't take my habits elsewhere.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
I'd go a LOT further than that. Having to guess who's (legally) handling your information means the system is already broken. Information sharing disclosure should be law in all civilized nations. No new laws should be able to be created that depend on information sharing without first definining and legislating information sharing itself.
Did Experian teach us nothing?
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
The large distros are all looking at compliance to some extent, although with no specific solutions as yet.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Identity verification is one of a million problems information technology has the power to solve if only someone could be trusted not to abuse that power. Unfortunately, humanity has yet to invent safe, reliable systems for the exercise of great power.
In the mid 21st century, corporate greed is the dominant force in human affairs, "corporation" being a construct deliberately designed to serve the few at the expense of the many. Consequently, the power to solve almost any dilemma is inseparable from using that power to exploit the people suffering from the problem. We no longer appear aware that it's possible to accomplish anything for the citizens of a nation without somehow ripping them off in the process.
But none of that is relevant here. Age verification is just another "save our children" political ploy, historically one of the most common moves in the fascist playbook. Americans are particularly vulnerable to this tactic, convinced as they are that the sight of genitals will cause the heads of anyone under 18 to explode. From communist mind control to Anita Bryant to the current crypto-fascist incarnation of the GOP, it never fails. When it comes to their children, Americans will embrace any notion, no matter how absurd, that allows them to ignore the reasons why independent agencies concerned with child welfare rate the U.S. as one of the worst rich nations in which to rear a child.
In the mid 21st century, corporate greed is the dominant force in human affairs, "corporation" being a construct deliberately designed to serve the few at the expense of the many. Consequently, the power to solve almost any dilemma is inseparable from using that power to exploit the people suffering from the problem. We no longer appear aware that it's possible to accomplish anything for the citizens of a nation without somehow ripping them off in the process.
But none of that is relevant here. Age verification is just another "save our children" political ploy, historically one of the most common moves in the fascist playbook. Americans are particularly vulnerable to this tactic, convinced as they are that the sight of genitals will cause the heads of anyone under 18 to explode. From communist mind control to Anita Bryant to the current crypto-fascist incarnation of the GOP, it never fails. When it comes to their children, Americans will embrace any notion, no matter how absurd, that allows them to ignore the reasons why independent agencies concerned with child welfare rate the U.S. as one of the worst rich nations in which to rear a child.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)