Hacker News Reader

Comment by kerridge0 | Hacker News Reader

I had an idea the other day that children could have some kind of jewellery that they can't remove like a curfew device. Probably impractical but at least it matches - children=limited rights and need protection. Once of age, no need, come of age, can remove.

View on HN

The idea that the state should get to tag some subset human as undeserving of rights is not something we should let ourselves get accustomed to.

Children already have less rights. Like voting rights missing, the right to buy alcohol (at least here in Germany), not allowed to drive a car, Forced to go to school, not allowed to watch quite a lot of movies - just to name a few, but also special protections. As they can't be held responsible below the age of 14 (so not court cases and prison time for kids <14). Just as one example.

So we already treat kids quite differently from adults. And tht is - imho - fine. Because kids are not just "small grown ups", they are just growing up.

I just do not think, that KYC/age verification is the right way to go - or even feasible in how it is being approached. I am for denying Meta, TikTok and the others the opportunity to exploit kids. But I would rather much have them regulated in a way that just forbidds them their predatory ways overall, then to give them even more data in the form of verified idetities and the knowledge that this account is within a specific age range ad also a "real human being", making that data even more valuable for advertisers.

There is quite a difference between say having to hold a driver's license when driving or having to show the cashier your ID when buying beer, and having something attached to your body, for years, for the crime of simply having been born.

I abhore the idea of having something attached to ones body. I wanted to show, that we already have systems in place that work and do not need such a horrible intrusive way of marking children.

Sorry for being not more clear.

"Once of age, no need, come of age, can remove."

This seems very naive to me, to be honest.

If you're concerned with the fact that the government might have misaligned incentives to use a system beyond the originally given intent, I think the actual approaches that are in danger of being implemented should probably be something you focus on more than something that one person on an internet forum casually suggested

Yes! I was just thinking that - what if they become conditioned.. still I think it's worth considering, as a thought experiment in light of what seems to be happening - you get the same chains when you come of age instead, although they are virtual....

> Once of age, no need, come of age, can remove.

children don't tend to object to losing rights they never had in the first place.

get them used to livign with less rights and a lower standard of living and they wont' know what was taken away from them.

well, I agree with this, however... if you make it soo bad that it seems that adulthood will be a joy, maybe it will reduce the crash as the responsibilities start coming in? The restrictions that would ensure should be pretty transparent along the lines of well you can't do that because you're a kid, right?

At this point you might as well make it Battle Royale style. If you're not next to your countability buddy (an adult) when you use the internet, poof.

stupid idea

Stupid comment

Reply on news.ycombinator.com