Redditor accidentally reinvents discarded ’90s tool to escape today’s age gates

The '90s called. They want their flawed age verification methods back.

See full article...

 

[_jbd]

I'm still struggling to understand why the device-based age check isn't more popular.
Sure it has some flows, that kids sharing a device with and adult will go through.


But duh, isn't it the same with home-stored liquor?
How is the age-restriction applied on tvs ? With a damn parental code, so why not ask the same for the regular devices?

All the porn sites are compliant with the RTA flags.
That's so damn straightforward thing to do that the only rationale seems to not wanting to effectively prevent kids from reaching there but another 'hiden' agenda.

 

[brainpattern]

Perhaps parents can take some responsibility for what their kids are doing online? How come we have helicopter parents irl, but kids can do pretty much whatever they want unattended online?

In our home, the family PC is in the living room and we're using Cloudflare's family DNS along with Pihole, seems to do a pretty good job overall. It's also important to talk with the kids as well as pay attention to what they're getting into. Doesn't take much effort.

Eta this is just another example of over-legislation with ineffective laws no one asked for.

 

[orwelldesign]

Oh, for fuck's sake:

Kids are going to find porn regardless. There's not a damn thing anyone can do about, and never has been. My dad described finding porn (by the standards of the era) when he was 12.

In 1940.

The most important thing to tell your kids is that porn isn't real. That it's sex theatre, not sex, and that it's totally okay for them to feel turned on when they see something they're into.

But you have to actually talk to them.

These are stupid laws written for stupid reasons, which will have stupid outcomes and not do a damn thing to address the "problem."

Age gating isn't a solution to anything at all.

 

[Iphtashu Fitz]

How is the age-restriction applied on tvs ? With a damn parental code, so why not ask the same for the regular devices?

All the porn sites are compliant with the RTA flags.
That's so damn straightforward thing to do that the only rationale seems to not wanting to effectively prevent kids from reaching there but another 'hiden' agenda.

How do you set up such a code on a smartphone or tablet? You would need lock virtually everything since it’s fairly trivial to find porn not only on porn websites, but in search results from Google, Bing, etc. and also through many other apps.

And no, not all porn sites are compliant with anything. There are so many hosted in other countries where US laws (or other countries for that matter) mean nothing.

 

[DrewW]

Adult Check inadvertently sent my high school nerd friend group on a minor crime spree. We used to get the ID codes from warez bbs until my friend Rob found a primitive credit card number generator that would spit out numbers that worked locally, and sometimes worked even if they dialed the avs card verification.

Within a week, someone had built a fake mailbox on a rural road and we would take turns trying to buy random things from catalogs. I think you could somehow “win” the game by getting the most stuff or the weirdest stuff.

Then one day the fake mailbox just disappeared. Gone. And AVS shortly became standard and killed the golden cracker. But for a few short months porn age verification lead us into a life of crime.

 

[Michillaneous]

Meanwhile the most violent content does not have age restrictions.


Consensual sex is bad.
Violence is ok.
Violence is good if it is an angry righteous white guy with a gun.

Nobody is making John Wick so difficult to access that people are using vpns. But a woman's bush is a scourge of evil that will corrupt our children.

 

[gavron]

But a solution has not yet been found...

Since before the Internet it's been a rule in the IT world that YOU CAN'T FIX SOCIAL PROBLEMS WITH TECHNOLOGY. That's still true today.

It applies to disallowing encryption, preventing minors from access content, and even preventing minors from driving their parents' cars. Minors used to smoke cigarettes, now they vape, and none of the laws, restrictions, required "posting" of the Surgeon General warning have materially changed that. Minors also go rob convenience stores and run out with 12-packs of beers because we have stupid laws. (Specifically laws that treat 18-20 year olds as minors with respect to alcohol purchase, possession, and firearm possession.)

If this weren't the most dysfunctional Congress and POTUS ever we could posit that it's THIS administration and Congress that's the problem, but it's not. It's parents who won't take responsibility for raising their kids; who want the nanny-state to do that; they want laws to "deter" (doesn't work, prevent repeat offenders (recidivists) and they lobby the morons they elected to pass stupid legislation to force private firms to incur costs, drive out the "little guy" who can't afford it... so "Big Tech" (not a thing) wins. Congress critters get to claim a win.

And none of this changes minors accessing anything.

Very complete article - lots of great detail!!

 

[Auie]

I'm still struggling to understand why the device-based age check isn't more popular.
Sure it has some flows, that kids sharing a device with and adult will go through.


But duh, isn't it the same with home-stored liquor?
How is the age-restriction applied on tvs ? With a damn parental code, so why not ask the same for the regular devices?

All the porn sites are compliant with the RTA flags.
That's so damn straightforward thing to do that the only rationale seems to not wanting to effectively prevent kids from reaching there but another 'hiden' agenda.

Well, for one thing there has yet to be been a system invented that isn't easily circumvented by kids, for example, even the latest fancy AI facial recognition technology is fooled by holding up a photograph to the camera, and for another, once such systems are widely adopted to try to block one group from accessing one thing, they can easily be modified to block other groups from accessing other things, and in the end become a form of draconian censorship that nobody wants built into the products they buy.

 

[NomadUK]

The authors warn that lawmakers are not relying enough on evidence-backed policy evaluations to truly understand the consequences of circumvention strategies before passing laws.

Gosh, ya think?

 

[fenris_uy]

Last month, a study analyzing the relative popularity of Google search terms found that age verification laws shift users' search behavior. It's impossible to tell if the shift represents young users attempting to circumvent the child-focused law or adult users who aren't the actual target of the laws. But overall, enforcement causes nearly half of users to stop searching for popular adult sites complying with laws and instead search for a noncompliant rival (48 percent) or virtual private network (VPN) services (34 percent), which are used to mask a location and circumvent age checks on preferred sites, the study found.

If I remember correctly, this kinds of laws only require age verification if more than X amount of content was porn, right? So consumers could just view the porn on Bing, right?

 

[Meettitan]

So, now I can't have a steak because children can't chew it properly?

 

[cyrano]

Best age verification checking tool of all time? Leisure Suit Larry

 

[fenris_uy]

In our home, the family PC is in the living room

And what about what they view in incognito mode on their phone away from your home network?

What your children do unattended on the net is something that you need to talk with your children about, not trying to solve with tech.

 

[Little-Zen]

This was a fantastic article, thank you, Ashley.

 

[RickRoyLeonPrisZhoraRacha]

Perhaps parents can take some responsibility for what their kids are doing online? How come we have helicopter parents irl, but kids can do pretty much whatever they want unattended online?

In our home, the family PC is in the living room and we're using Cloudflare's family DNS along with Pihole, seems to do a pretty good job overall. It's also important to talk with the kids as well as pay attention to what they're getting into. Doesn't take much effort.

Eta this is just another example of over-legislation with ineffective laws no one asked for.

Parents? Most a too busy either working 2 jobs to make ends meet because inflation (and looming recession coming) and that the government wants more children (tax IDs) but won't lower loan rates, increase revolving interest to variable loan-shark rates over 30%, and distracted by inept social media. No, the government shouldn't be a nanny, and yet it sees a way to monetize age verification with private-unregulated companies.

How many southern states (right-wing zealots) are pushing this agenda, because, hypocrites.

 

[Big0range]

porn isn't real... it's sex theatre

Oh, I like that -- it's much more cultured!! I'll start telling people when they ask what I did over the weekend "I enjoyed the theatre!"

 

[lithven]

As someone who was once a teenager, I would much rather kids access "legitimate" porn sites than go looking for something worse. I'd rather pay for a VPN or help my kid fake an age verification than have them go looking in the darker corners of the Internet.

I'm not too concerned about porn showing up at random while just browsing the mainstream Internet (especially since things like ad blockers exist). As such I think almost any porn they'd be exposed to would be because they went looking for it. From a content perspective I'm honestly much more concerned about some of the "influencers" on YouTube and TikTok, the likes of Joe Rogan, and similar dreck without any porn involved at all.

 

[numerobis]

Isn’t the easy and foolproof technical solution just to require scanning the kid’s fake ID before showing the porn?

 

[numerobis]

If I remember correctly, this kinds of laws only require age verification if more than X amount of content was porn, right? So consumers could just view the porn on Bing, right?

« I was just browsing pornhub for the articles » ?

 

[BruceTheLoon]

Your cellular provider knows your age, so your phone can know your age in a secure manner that's not spoofable.

There's no good reason that we couldn't design an end to end protocol for websites and apps that queries your phone to see if the user of the phone is at least a certain age. There are no privacy concerns here, and if there are, you could surely opt out, in which case you would not be allowed to access any age gated content (this is the equivalent to 'opting out' of providing an ID at a bar).

As the bill payer, they know my age. Maybe.

But I don't have to register the users of other phones on the plan. They don't ask for that information. I buy the plan, stuck one of the sims in a phone and give it to the wife and kids. It may be against some countries laws, but it happens and probably to the majority of multi-phone plans.

Same for prepaid SIMs. Whoever bought it is known, not necessarily who is using it.

 

[Printzer]

Meanwhile the most violent content does not have age restrictions.


Consensual sex is bad.
Violence is ok.
Violence is good if it is an angry righteous white guy with a gun.

Nobody is making John Wick so difficult to access that people are using vpns. But a woman's bush is a scourge of evil that will corrupt our children.

"The gun is good! The penis is evil!" - Zardoz (1974)

Boggles the mind that a 50 year old movie (that many considered a parody) has nailed some aspects of the future so accurately.

 

[sapphir8]

There were verification programs? I didn’t have a problem accessing stuff back then.

 

[fenris_uy]

Underneath the Google and Bing, you have a browser. So not that complicated to implement at the browser level.

I'm very sorry, but all the "limits" that come up from the "device-based" check/limit are easily covered, and provide a much more robust approach than a stupid "site-based" check.

And as far as "non compliance" is concerned, yes, they are non compliant with the 'site-based' restriction, but they all advertise explicitly what they offer.
The RTA flag in the html headers is very clearly active on the vast majority of the sites.

You don't like site-based solutions, but you are arguing that the websites should advertise explicitly what they provided and the HTTP that they provide should have a Header indicating what they provide. So, you do like site-based solutions.

All you need to stop your schema, is a web site that doesn't provides the RTA header, and that provides adult content.

 

[Mentil]

But a woman's bush is a scourge of evil that will corrupt our children.

A woman and an apple tree corrupted humanity. A woman and a bush... well, can't be too careful. /s

 

[fafalone]

or adult users who aren't the actual target of the laws.

Adults are absolutely the target of these laws. Republicans have demonstrated over and over they don't give a single solitary fuck about protecting children (especially after they're born) and these laws are pushed by people and groups like the Project 2025 goons who want to ban pornography completely. Lacking support for that, this is an intermediate step designed to make porn harder to access and eventually attack the sites for noncompliance, while having the added bonus of being able to find out what porn people like, to target LGBT people further down the road.

 

[Bikeskiread]

Interesting article on a part of the 90s I was too busy to experience. Today’s social media engagement optimization algorithms / self-radicalization systems make porn seem almost innocuous.

Favourite phrases from the article:

But a solution has not yet been found as parents and their lawyers circle social media companies they believe are harming their kids

And

delegate-and-pray approach

 

[_jbd]

You don't like site-based solutions, but you are arguing that the websites should advertise explicitly what they provided and the HTTP that they provide should have a Header indicating what they provide. So, you do like site-based solutions
All you need to stop your schema, is a web site that doesn't provides the RTA header, and that provides adult content.

Sure, but again, that's more difficult to argue from the site-side that "it's too difficult/privacy-intrusive/expensive" (strike the wrong word) to advertise explicitly what the site "offers".

The major issue with the site-based filter is that you hope that it requires "hundreds" of site to manage their own solution, ensure that it is compliant, solid, etc.
Quite the opposite to a device/browser age-code similar to what you can find in the set-top-box that provide X-rated content and require a parental code.

Again, I really don't get why the parental-code exist on a set-top-box, but not a "web device"
What would be the challenge in embedding this by design in all the chromium/firefox/etc devices ?

Damn, it's already in the game consoles for GAMES !
Why can't it be used ALSO on the web browsing ?

I know that there would be ways to install a "non compliant" browser, but that's not the point.
Ensuring that a device-based simple filtering exists would void the "my kid risk accessing xxhub by mistake".

I fully agree that some shady sites would still hide their true "identity", but this approach would be much more robust and less intrusive than the site-based stupid ideas.

 

[Mentil]

The "this is easily worked around via VPNs" commenters will be surprised once the 'all VPNs are banned now' law sails through Congress in order to patch the gaping hole in the upcoming 'think of the children' laws (e.g. KOSA, Take It Down). Counterarguments on feasibility and how this affects companies and legitimate usage will be steamrolled by ideologues who already ignore reality.

A 'coincidental side effect' is that the government will have also forbidden a common way of anonymously accessing websites, for e.g. coordinating direct action.

 

[DontBuyCrApple]

1. This is a masterclass in how to take 1 reddit post and turn it into a treatise on inane annals of prudish pursuits.

2. There's a Dilbert comic from that era that is still as relevant as ever - look up qnHAd5k.gif on imgur

3. We're talking about getting better mousetraps, while the entire house is on fire.

 

[fenris_uy]

Sure, but again, that's more difficult to argue from the site-side that "it's too difficult/privacy-intrusive/expensive" (strike the wrong word) to advertise explicitly what the site "offers".

The major issue with the site-based filter is that you hope that it requires "hundreds" of site to manage their own solution, ensure that it is compliant, solid, etc.
Quite the opposite to a device/browser age-code similar to what you can find in the set-top-box that provide X-rated content and require a parental code.

Again, I really don't get why the parental-code exist on a set-top-box, but not a "web device"
What would be the challenge in embedding this by design in all the chromium/firefox/etc devices ?

Damn, it's already in the game consoles for GAMES !
Why can't it be used ALSO on the web browsing ?

I know that there would be ways to install a "non compliant" browser, but that's not the point.
Ensuring that a device-based simple filtering exists would void the "my kid risk accessing xxhub by mistake".

I fully agree that some shady sites would still hide their true "identity", but this approach would be much more robust and less intrusive than the site-based stupid ideas.

Because a smartphone or table is a general computing device, not a game console. A game console or set top box, isn't a general computing device. Even if google added it to Chrome on Android, that wouldn't prevent me from downloading Opera for Android and use that to access the content. Or accessing that content with a side loaded app. Or accessing that content that is published inside of Twitter that isn't going to send a RTA header when you are viewing certain tweets, because they don't know if the tweets are lewd or not. Or Reddit. Or Facebook, or TikTok, etc.

No kids access pornhub by mistake, they go looking for it. And even dumb kids, knows somebody that knows how to sideload apps.

 

[deadman12-4]

question - it seems implicit that the "good porn sites" are the ones all owned by the same couple companies that through very NON-ETHICAL means (mobster like, extortion, blackmail, ect) have taken over much of online porn.

Why are all other sites (those who can get away with non-compliance) extra bad? All those terrible things people clutch their pearls over existing "on the internets" can often be seen on whatever_tube as well, or simulated versions of them.

What makes a non-compliant site automatically "dangerous"?

 

[KKBaloney]

"That likely wouldn't stop some vendors from collecting or retaining data anyway, Goldman suggested."

Bosh, I can't believe today's informed and ethical business culture would condone violating someone's privacy for profit.

 

[DJ Farkus]

lawmakers are not relying enough on evidence-backed policy evaluations to truly understand the consequences of circumvention strategies before passing laws

Gosh, you mean re-election talking points and fallacious media panics are the actual commodities of the system, and not measurable harms and benefits to citizens? Say it ain't so...

 

[almsorne]

Perhaps parents can take some responsibility for what their kids are doing online? How come we have helicopter parents irl, but kids can do pretty much whatever they want unattended online?

In our home, the family PC is in the living room and we're using Cloudflare's family DNS along with Pihole, seems to do a pretty good job overall. It's also important to talk with the kids as well as pay attention to what they're getting into. Doesn't take much effort.

Eta this is just another example of over-legislation with ineffective laws no one asked for.

Genuinely curious how this works out for you. Approximately what age are the kids? And how do you create a reasonable sense of privacy for the kids as they grow older without them feeling like you put the PC in the living room specifically so you could watch everything they do? And does anybody have a phone or tablet that would get used to do "questionable" things that they wouldn't want to do on the family PC?

Would love to hear your thoughts, coming from a parent who is going to have to figure all this out over the next few years as the kids start getting older.