Online age verification is coming, and privacy is on the chopping block
theverge.com
theverge.com
Having some form of digital identity is not an intrinsically bad thing, but there are compromises at play. ePassports are a good example of something that tries to provide decentralisation and security at a large scale, but they need to be well scoped to the area that they're used in (for instance travel).
It is possible to build systems that provide short-lived attestation of facts that are scoped to a minimal level of data. We just need to choose to build them rather than allow our lives to become dictated by some horrifying future version of Experian/Yoti/friends.
The problem is that it's expensive to implement. Your options are A) going with an identity provider who charges you per session, B) interfacing with an eIDserver provider yourself (which the identity provider in A does for you) with all the necessary certifications, government red tape, and UX intricacies, or C) also building your own eIDserver, which is a lot more certifications and red tape, plus mandatory very specific hardware HSM that, to my knowledge, aren't even available anymore.
Add to that the users who, so far, are most likely confronted with this for the first time and the clunky "official" apps (though you could implement your own) that require your website to do funny stuff like redirecting to localhost.
There are enough problems to be solved and age verification doesn't solve any at all.
But any other service won't get my ID and I left a lot of those behind already.
But I doubt there will be enough legislative clout to enforce anything here. Maybe the EU will reinforce its poor tech standing again (although much of this isn't only due to bad policy).
When did real Authentication of people go from being a "hard problem" to ideologically forbidden?