triceratops 10 hours ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46223051 This one works well. Or at least, as well as age verification for tobacco and alcohol. And equally privacy-preserving.

  • chrisweekly 8 hours ago

    Agreed! Great idea. I'll save others the click:

    "The insistence on perfect age verification requires ending anonymity. Age verification to the level of buying cigarettes or booze does not. Flash a driver's license at a liquor store to buy a single-use token, good for one year, and access your favorite social media trash. Anonymity is maintained, and most kids are locked out. In the same way that kids occasionally obtain cigs or beer despite safeguards, sometimes they may get their hands on a code. Prosecute anyone who knowingly sells or gives one to a minor."

    • CrossVR 5 hours ago

      This does nothing to protect anonymity as you are still assigned a unique code that has been tied to your ID at the liquor store.

      • fc417fc802 4 hours ago

        Historically liquor store checks were purely visual. These days they are often digital, meaning claims about privacy might (or might not) be outdated. The general principle still applies though. The physical infrastructure already exists, the ID checks do not necessarily need to be digitized or recorded, and even if they are the issued tokens don't need to be tied to the check.

        Grocery stores already sell age restricted items as well as gift cards that require activation. The state could issue "age check cards" that you could purchase for some nominal fee. That would require approximately zero additional infrastructure in most of the industrialized world. The efficacy would presumably be equivalent to that for alcohol and tobacco.

shostack 13 hours ago

That feels like a feature and not a bug given the way some of this stuff is heading.

Forgeties79 10 hours ago

LinkedIn’s verification is maddening

  • lostlogin 10 hours ago

    LinkedIn is maddening. If you make the mistake of signing up, it takes years to escape their spam and bs.

    • toast0 8 hours ago

      I got years of their spam without signing up. Only after several years did they add a way to opt out an email address without making an account.

      • fc417fc802 3 hours ago

        If they don't provide an easy opt-out link then why not just block the sender and move on? Unlike the less legal operations I wouldn't expect a legitimate business to rotate domains or otherwise attempt to evade blocks.

        • immibis 33 minutes ago

          Why block when you can report to Spamhaus?