Don't fall for the trap. The question isn't how we should technically force age verification on anybody. The question is why they're pushing it onto everyone. I did not consent to this, neither did you.
Seriously, there is something tremendously wrong with governance when politicians keep changing the whole world around us, without us having any say in it at all. The threat this measure poses to the internet and society is significant, yet it is being pushed through without any substantial debate or push back. This just is not how decent and actual democracies should function. What messed up timeline is this?
That's where you're wrong. Most people actually do agree with age verification. Just because a decision is stupid it doesn't mean it's undemocratic. Trump was elected democratically, twice. Brexit passed through a referendum.
It's just like democracy. Without the "dem(b)" part. Much better now.
We have such warm feelings about it! What could possibly go wrong with doing such strong governance and extreme-right parties polling at record highs in more than half the EU countries? We have warm feelings now. Or maybe the warm feelings the result of 30 years of climate action in the EU. Luckily, the extreme right is hard at work defending our right to airconditioning!
> Social media is destroying children's brains! Do you want access to be delayed until a certain age?
> Do you want children under a certain age to be banned from social media, which means that you will now have to give your ID, only with Android or iOS?
99% of people understand this as "you need a smartphone" which is not a problem in 2026, even for the elderly.
Maybe 99% of people have surrendered to Google/Apple (include me there), but the 1% has a valid point...
1. By doing this, the EU is killing any alternative operating systems for phones: no one will switch to one if they can't access online services. Banks are already making it extremely hard.
2. Google and Apple might be better regarded than Huawei, but they are not moral (or they are not guaranteed to remain so).
3. The very idea of a de facto state-enforced monopoly on operating systems is outrageous.
E.g. In a country of 100M people, if 60% agree with a bill and it becomes law, the country has imposed that law on 40M people against their will. That's just as true in a dictatorship as it is in a democracy. The more areas of our lives government involves itself in, the bigger this problem becomes.
No, it did not.
> E.g. In a country of 100M people, if 60% agree with a bill and it becomes law
That's not how that law was adopted.
People make dumb decisions and don't think about possible outcomes twice, or even once. But (unfortunately, in this case) this is a core principle in a democracy. People may be lied to, or at least they are fearmongered into thinking that age verification is needed and encryption needs to be weakened because they thing they have nothing to hide, but if in the end they elect the people that are pro-age-verification, it's perfectly democratic.
IMO the media (including, most importantly, social media) is the problem, not the politicians and/or the democracy or whatever. They all play their part, sure, but it's how people are influenced by the current state of media what's driving all these populistic forces.
On top of that, the relevant law they would have to comply with in those countries would be the laws of those countries, and those are the governments committing the genocides.
The Politician's Syllogism (or Fallacy) [0]:
1. We must do something.
2. This is something.
3. Therefore, we must do this.
I’m in the UK and very anti Brexit. But were we still in, I would have no idea how to influence what happens behind those closed doors at the European Commision.
Granted the current UK Labour/ Conservative pact on these issues show they’re completely out of control. But I still theoretically know how I could influence policy.
I mean even in the EU there's theoretic ways to influence policy, it's just that the system is currently sabotaged and/or partly not strong enough to withstand politicians who want to actively work against it.
Not being for or against UK or Brexit, but I don't think this is a EU problem. These kinds of problems exist in all European democracies, at least this is what it feels like currently.
The Parliament and Courts keep the Commission in check, although their… misguided rule of majority is bound to allow some nonsense to pass. Especially since the Commission is, in my view, made up of people that do NOT want what the citizens do. You could argue they represent the majority of their specific countries, but even that is stretching things a bit given how many people actually vote.
So: the Parliament, the Courts (you can bring them issues), the European Citizens’ Initiative, and indirectly through your own country’s agencies (e.g. your local DPA).
It’s not that different from the high levels of indirection and bureaucracy in most democracies, I think. (Not that I’m defending the EU, there’s plenty to attack.)
[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/Twitter/comments/1uk6a98/lets_confi...
The representatives elected by Europeans did though: 483 votes in favor, 92 against
I’m no conspiracy theorist, but it does seem that there’s an international influence outweighing democracy.
Cui bono?
But the null hypothesis is that there is no new legislation to vote on. It must have come from somewhere!
So whatever you opinion is on the subject of forcing age verification, it is worth looking at the technical solution, especially if it is your domain of expertise.
Shifting this question benefits only those who want to force this upon us.
Ping me when people are physically tortured by police for facebook posts, because that's what happens there.
Since you seem unfamiliar with the following, I will leave this here for your perusal: