If you host non-adult content and there's no way for randos to upload it you don't need to verify.
What is safe for underaged is not defined and can change on a whim. Therefor, any sane person running a website that is not "explicitly for underageds" will verify and eject said underageds. Especially since the one in charge (hired by the company) can be personally liable for any "harm" comming to the underaged.
Websites that seem they need to track users immediately and across their entire web space implemented popups because it's the only way to get consent before showing content, but that's the website's choice, not a consequence of the law.
« in their professional experience, age verification is only ever invoked in discussions around what we might call explicit adult content: pornography, alcohol, tobacco, and firearms. So that’s what they assume this discussion is about, here, in the UK. They don’t realise, until I explain it to them, that the UK legislative discussion is not just about preventing children from accessing those four kinds of content. It’s about mandating age verification for anything and everything, for every user, of every age, in front of access to all topics, all subjects, all sites, all service providers, all opinions, and all content. The whole public open web. Everything. »
Furthermore the British government is planning to force all websites to verify their visitors’ age (allegedly using government approved providers), which is orders of magnitudes more onerous than GDPR (me: which is actually almost free unless you abuse your users’ data).
Although i can't find any clear statement of pronouns [1] https://webdevlaw.uk/about/ [2] https://twitter.com/WebDevLaw
Sometimes, you must call a spade “a spade”
Do you have some information to contribute to the discussion or are you suggesting that the author should lie instead?