UK’s Starmer gives Apple, Google 3 months to stop children sending nude images
Do they actually know how the technology works? They will have to scan everything inbound and outbound connections, basically managed devices.
Apple and Google have been given a three-month ultimatum to make it impossible for children to take, share or view nude images on their smartphones, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Monday.
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/europe/article/3356412/uks-starmer-gives-apple-google-3-months-stop-children-sending-nude-imagesOpen linkView original on lemmy.dbzer0.com284
Comments97
Technology as a religion strikes again.
We can't possibly solve this problem the human way, with parent and children awareness and communication.
No, we must solve it with tech. Every problem must be solved with tech !
What a sad world.
I mean, I'm all for forcing big tech to provide better parental control tools. Because right now they provide the bare minimum that often locks you out of control... and it's a hassle to set up, maintain and manage.
Take e.g. Apple. To do any parental control you need an Apple account. Reasonable, to this point. But! To actually have any control, you need Apple devices. It isn't enough to log in through a browser, because you can't properly set rules, limits, block sites or apps, monitor communications, no, you need an iPhone or iPad or a Mac. You can't approve access requests if your child wants to go to a non-allowlisted website for e.g. school work.
Oh and if we're at allowlists and blocklists... no platform at the moment offers ANY kind of automated lists the parents can enable. They need to manually hunt things down and add them. So you either have your kid constantly pinging you to access resources, or you're constantly reviewing what they're visiting, searching for, etc., to block inappropriate content. And with how many porn websites there are out there that are specifically CLANDESTINE porn sites that at first appear generic kids games but if you go the right way, you find porn, is staggering.
Oh and one more thing. When are we punishing Google, Meta, etc., for allowing intentionally child-targeted adult themed ads and recommendations? Or did we forget how YouTube allowed incredibly disturbing content in ads and recommendations FOR KIDS (as in, literally injected into playlists meant for kids)?
I feel like all these locks and bars that people apparently believe that they need to be good parents to their children are a little... much? My mother wasn't an exemplary parent exactly so I wouldn't go down her route, but I think there's a case to be made for connecting to your child on a human level, and being their guide rather than their warden.
It makes me think of this hysterical American mindset I've bumped into over the years. I've got friends who likened me walking a couple of blocks to school as a six year old as child abuse, when they themselves have no idea how to operate a washing machine. I did experience abuse, but it was more of the slammed into the floor and choked out, than going to and from school on my own.
There's a happy medium to be made, where you can gradually introduce concepts to a child at a level that's appropriate. Fostering a connection to a child that makes them feel like they can trust in you, and safely go to you when they need it, while also having the freedom to make decisions and grow on their own.
I think this is the far more pressing issue. Capitalism will gladly throw the health of people under the bus if it makes them a quick buck.
It's a different approach based on age, too - the parental controls Apple provides are great for a toddler on an iPad, and may even work into elementary school... but not forever. You can't hide kids from reality, no matter what you take away. I knew too much and more by age 8 and we didn't even have the internet. When our son gets to be 6 or 7 we'll probably have to start explaining the concept of porn and online bad actors, and that's depressing, but it's the world we live in.
The issue is that unfiltered access to the internet is dangerous to kids - and at a certain age, kids do want to discover that side without any parental interference.
Limiting what they can access is not an unhealthy approach. It's protective, especially nowadays when certain companies (looking at you, Roblox and Meta) will shelter paedos because it's a financially viable thing to do, repercussions and hurt children be damned.
And there HAS to be a balance between adults having unfettered access to the entirety of the internet, without having to take a selfie every time they want to have a wank or approach any remotely adult topic. It literally takes a single penstroke from the government to categorise a mundane topic "adult" and start listing people - because ID-ing yourself in a "trust us, your data is safe" (except ignore all the data breaches that have already happened!) environment will TOTALLY not lead to issues. I mean what could go wrong when you start collecting the IDs of trans kids reaching out for help because of abuse, gay/bi/lesbian/etc. kids similarly seeking help, suicidal people seeking help, and the list goes on? What problem could there be from that data leaking, right?
This bullshit WILL get reversed the moment a prominent politician's weird porn browsing habits leak, and I do hope that happens sooner than later. But even when that happens, we need a SANE option to protect children - and that's by giving the tools to parents, parents whom are mostly overloaded with work, and can't afford to spend hours a day not interacting with their children but reviewing what they do on the internet.
Yes, being a better parent to your child IS part of that, but so is setting up virtual boundaries.
You say things I agree with, and things I don't.
I struggle to see the benefit in virtual boundaries, and think it's better to foster a healthy trusting relationship with one's child. They'll encounter bad situations at some point sooner or later, and at that point having shielded them from it in lieu of giving them the tools to deal with it, will have been harmful rather than helpful.
Further, this kind of informational censoring can be used to actively harm people as well. I've met many people whose lifelines are their virtual connections to their communities, and had their parents been at all technically inclined these people likely wouldn't be alive today.
Children won't spontaneously combust if they encounter pornography. My first exposure happened at around six or seven, same time half of my classmates. Someone found a pornographic card deck in the bushes during recess.
You can literally do most parental controls with your home network if you know what you are doing which means those that don't will have to learn, I know how terrible a parent has to learn something to take care of their child. You can even enforce it outside the house by setting up a tunnel to your home network on a phone and making it so the phone has to use the tunnel in order to connect to the internet otherwise there is no internet access, so your network parental controls are always enforced. Hell you could make it so the phone only gets internet access when home too, to enforce even more limitations on internet access.
Yes this will require constant updating as things change and you discover workarounds and new apps are developed, but as a parent aren't you supposed to be constantly learning and adapting for your child anyways? You may even need to buy some gadgets too which again is nothing new for a parent to do to protect their child.
This shit can already be done but lazy parents and shitty governments are going to make it everyone's problem.
The fact that you think this shows that you've never even attempted to set up parental control...
And sure, let's have parents who work 10-12 hours just so the family survives, do YET ANOTHER chore, which they need to constantly manage.
How about instead of that, big tech can get their shit together and provide proper parental controls? Including router manufacturers. It's minimal effort from them, makes life easier for millions of parents.
Its really not that hard to do you could literally find a youtuber to walk you through the whole process since it seems you could use some hand holding with tech.
But hey if you didn't want so many chores to do after working long hours maybe consider that before having a child. Not my fault parents didn't think it would be a lot of work.
I mean yeah that would be great if big tech could provide us with more protections and stop tracking everything we do but they aren't going to and governments take their bribes so they won't force them to. So parents are going to need to figure out how to protect their children and adapt to our online world. You can learn these skills and protect your children or not its up to you.
Your entire take is idiotic as best.
As a society we should strive for making life easier for everyone, but especially those who are having trouble with technology due to lack of time or resources.
The solution isn't to go online and start spouting off about "how you should've considered that you'll need to learn a dozen new technologies just to raise your kid", but to provide actually actionable, simplified enough solutions that people can utilise.
Your take is especially idiotic when you put it in perspective of ALL OUR FUCKING PRIVACY RIGHTS BEING VIOLATED because parents are already struggling to keep their kids safe. And you just shrug your shoulders and tell others to parent better? What kind of a fuckwit are you?
I'm just being realistic I said I would like for more protections from tech companies but that isn't the world we live in, but I guess you couldnt comprehend that.
I offered a solution so that parents could protect their children TODAY. That's why I provided an actual actionable solution a parent who is worried about their child could do to protect them now. You say you care about privacy rights well why don't you stop complaining and start protecting your family rather than wait for the tech companies or government to start caring about you?
Your options are to protect yourself and your family or complain online. I'm sorry it will require some work to do but hey like I said that is what you signed up for. Yes you will need to do better because we live in a fucked up world that doesn't make it easy on you. I wish it was different but its not. But go ahead get mad because I offered a way to solve these issues, rather than simply agreeing that there is nothing we can do.
Check the discussion you're on right now.
IT IS ABOUT FUCKING LEGISLATION THAT FORCES BIG TECH TO DO SOMETHING FOR "PROTECTING CHILDREN".
My solution is that since we're already legally forcing big tech to do something, then why not do it the right way and force them to give tools to parents to enable them to protect their kids, instead of this fucking dystopian operating system level privacy erasure.
And your solution is still to not give a fuck about the laws that are being introduced, AND not give a fuck about parents besides telling them to "protect their kids". You do see why your take is idiotic, right?
If they don’t invent excuses to take tech away from people, for scanning everything , to force us using AIs which tell us the stories they want told, how will they retain power and hide their crimes?
Tech and invigilation*
There is a nice german word for such thinking. It's "Vollkasko-mentalität" - Vollkasko is car insurance which covers everything + mentality.
I also find it funny that any existing smartphones have to work in this system too. I'd like to see the performance of any filter technology on an Android 4 based device that hasn't seen an update or an replacement battery for decades. And what about feature phones?
I'd say let them catapult themselves back into analog times, it'll be fun to watch when they realize that filtering that requires opening letters like back in East Germany.
Is Playboy back in business?
Yeah bro we're totally just scanning everything you send just on the off chance that a child (even though you have none and don't know any) are takes your phone and uses it to send a dick pic haha no bro don't worry it's for their safety haha
And, because Apple cares about us, they can create the Personal Pictures Privacy Pro subscription. A plan where any compromising images are kept out of public dark web Facebook groups, for the low price of $29.95 per month.
Disclaimer: Privacy and security applied by your Personal Pictures Privacy Pro plan will be generated by mid-tier cost effective AI, which itself was trained on the work of the most affordable people who told us they were privacy and security experts.
I estimate about 3 months until an inevitable data breach where it turns out they actually keep copies of all of the images because of course they will.
Old_man_yelling_at_cloud-Simpsons.gif
If Apple and Google are sending kids nude images, then their parents are showing them porn by giving them phones.
Let me guess, the solution is age verification for everyone?
because it's not about the kids, it's never been about the kids. It's about collecting/harvesting user data, IDs, and tracking said user.
Age verification for social media isn't working. why? because people will simply just stop using it. now porn? well they figure everyone gets horny and loves porn so it's the next best bet to continue to try and collect said data.
We all know the EASIEST solution to this issue, it's like you set, parental controls. it's always been the easiest solution. always. but THAT doesn't collect a users data.
Look i'll be honest if all these governments and companies just straight up came out and said "ok, we lied, it's not about the kids we just want your data. that's it. we want it so we can track it and sell it. we need the easy money." I'd slightly respect them more for it.
Seriously how about this "you allow us to collect and sell your data and we'll give you a tax break or a cut of the profits from selling it. we'll make this an opt in thing" just do that. just be god damn honest.
Easy, just send every parent who gives a minor a phone to prison. Problem solved!
The end result is further controlling people and surveilling them. Privacy is being murdered in record time.
Soon every person will have a mandatory telescreen in their pocket, linked to their facial recognition in a Palantir run 'government' database.
Surveillance is not security. When fully formed Surveillance is slavery.
If one party decides to make the country an open air prison, all it does is secure political victory towards their opposition party that intend to reverse those changes. The flag might change, but the methods stay the same.
My partner sent me some dirties and the new iphone asked her if she was sure.
Creepy shit.
It’s all done on device on iPhone, not really that creepy. You can also disable it if you want.
You can disable it for now
Starmer's labour government has been an absolute shit show. Fuck the child safety act.
With Labour like this, who needs Tories?
Wasn't it a Tory policy that Labour adopted? Either way, absolutely awful and really does illustrate how little difference there between the major parties.
Oh no OH NOOO
"Fuck the child" safety act
Over reach dressed up as protection for children.
I don't have kids myself so can't say I understand how prevalent this problem is, but I can imagine it's not as big of a problem as what politicians are making out. Certainly not big enough that this can be the answer, even if this legitimately required a solution, such a solution would surely be a last resort.
Easiest solution is awarness. Teach the parents how to monitor their children and how to use parental control. They can offer classes for this.
Its just crazy the amount of stupid laws that poo up in place of covering for poor parenting lol
On iOS parental controls let you choose to manage the child’s contacts. So they can only communicate with anyone you put in there. You can also block communication in apps. You can also block unapproved websites or let Apple block the ones in its list. You can set age restrictions on everything. You can be pretty heavy-handed if you want to. You can also buy the kid a dumb phone.
He may as well be saying that he needs to put cameras in every car to verify that kids are wearing seatbelts if they’re in the car. That would likely reduce more harm than this, but it’s also more obvious what the problem is.
Just allow parents to disable their child’s camera, simple?
Actually, yeah. That offloads the responsibility to the parents. I think that solution actually works...
What sort of nightmarish personal responsibility world are you proposing? I don't want to have to raise my own damn kids.
Make it illegal for their parents to give them phones and computing devices that can send and receive pictures. Problem solves.
No but seriously education for both parents and children. Because while I do believe these companies play their role in how children interact online and what they interact with, I don't believe they're going to be able to stop anyone from sending something or receiving something they want to send without invasive and possibly traumatic tactics that will effect people regardless of age group.
I wonder what would happen if those companies simply told the UK government it wasn't possible, and withdrew from the market?
Good riddance then
"We will change the law" means they haven't changed it yet. And this PM is so god damn popular in his own party, they are just trying to get his possible replacement in in an otherwise unnecessary byelection. This sounds decisive but isn't a fait accompli by any stretch of the imagination. The tech big guns will sound amenable to such a policy but will do fuck all.
Fucking hell, can we get an age and qualification limit on politicians already?
What’s more likely, the prime minister is a clueless idiot who keeps making blunder after blunder and is too stupid to even consider asking for advice from experts in the field, or he’s paid by terrorists?
I don't know how likely the second one is. But both can be true.
Maybe hold the parents accountable. Betya then they'll start caring about what their children are doing. Because yes, while there are adult perpetrators, there are also children themselves selling media they create on things like roblox servers. It's a rabbit hole.
Bonus: you don't have to invalidate everyone's right to fucking privacy.
Extra credit: you can still tax the fuck out of these trillion dollar corporations that are ruining the world.
I’m not sure if I agree with this take. To me, it is similar to saying we shouldn’t give kids free lunches, cause it’s the parents responsibility to feed their kid.
Like yeah, parents should be feeding their kid. But it’s also unreasonable to think that every single parent is doing that. It’s just not realistic, so we should definitely be feeding kids when they aren’t getting it at home.
On the same token, I don’t see anything wrong with trying to protect kids from talking with strangers, or getting sent explicit material, when their parents don’t know or care how to do it themselves.
then enforce child predator laws. or rape laws in general. thats a REAL rabbit hole that will disgust any normal person. the problem is that nobody wants to deal with the actual problem so they outsource it to privacy nightmares like what we are seeing now
I don’t think it HAS to be a privacy nightmare. It’s possible for all of this to happen securely on device.
That being said I do not trust most corporations to implement it securely.
The lunch analogy is too generic for the complexity here and I think it breaks down entirely given the innate assumption that a parent's responsibility is only a parent's responsibility, which isn't true.
Should the government provide free school lunches? Absolutely. That requires funding and legislative will. The government has a responsibility (well, theoretically) to protect and serve its people, including children and families. An overlap of responsibility if you will. Free school lunches does not infringe on anyone's rights and instead betters communities, eases burden on struggling parents, and helps students perform and receive proper nutrition. And should a family or student wish to not receive a school lunch, they are free to opt out and bring their own. It doesn't require scanning every student's lunchbox or installing surveillance infrastructure in every kitchen. The intervention is proportionate to the problem.
Starmer's proposal isn't. Preventing nude image sharing at the device level requires either client-side scanning of all communications or breaking end-to-end encryption entirely. That's mass surveillance infrastructure installed on every phone, affecting every adult, every journalist, every abuse survivor using encrypted messaging, every person who has ever sent a legal private image to another consenting adult. And unlike our lunch analogy, a family or student, nor an unaffiliated person altogether, has little to no option to opt out should they use one of these major platforms/devices. The harm of the intervention is categorically larger than the harm it addresses.
A better analogy: should a parent leave alcohol or an unsecured firearm accessible to a child? No, and we hold parents accountable for that. We don't require routine home inspections of every household to verify compliance. The accountability lands on the person who chose to bring the dangerous item into proximity with the child and who controls access to it. The parent pays for the phone. The parent pays for the data plan. The parent hands the child the device. The tools to monitor and restrict that device already exist, provided by the large platforms, on routers, etc, and are largely unused.
The problem is real. The solution being proposed requires dismantling privacy for everyone to address the failures of some. There are targeted interventions that haven't been exhausted. Those who stand to benefit are not the children, but the companies able to profit off the data collected and the governments able to invade privacy where there wasn't said existing infrastructure to do so.
This is a controlling party (government/private companies) abusing a moral panic which has been common throughout history. Just look at the Patriot Act.
I mostly agree with everything you say, except for one thing.
I’m pretty sure it’s technically possible to detect nude images, on device, 100% securely, without anyone ever knowing it was detected. This probably isn’t the approach that some corporations will take, but as far as I am aware, this is how the current nude detection on iPhone works. It’s all on device, and just blurs it so the user has to accept a warning before seeing the content. If you control your phone, you can disable it. If it’s a phone setup for a child, the child cannot disable it. It’s up to the parent to specify what the child is allowed to do.
Fair point, and I'll concede, but only partially, as it is nit what is being discussed here. Starmer's proposal isn't asking for Apple to expand their system, it's mandating platforms to comply and make it impossible, and the platforms can choose how to do so. On-device detection that never leaves the device is a meaningfully different privacy profile than server-side scanning or breaking E2E encryption. Apple's Communication Safety feature works roughly as you described and that architecture is less invasive than the worst case scenario. If every implementation were genuinely on-device, opt-in, parent-controlled, and open source verifiable, it would be a different conversation.
But that's where my concession stops.
We can only take a corporation's word that it's truly on-device and nothing is retained. The history of that promise is not encouraging. There have been multiple instances across the industry of companies guaranteeing on-device processing only for that data to appear in breach disclosures afterward. Closed, proprietary systems cannot be independently verified. We're being asked to trust the architecture of companies whose entire business model is built on data extraction.
There's also a false positive problem. Google has already implemented similar detection and there are confirmed cases of users having their entire Google accounts permanently locked after photographing their own child in the bath. Emails, photos, Drive, business files, income streams, all gone, with no meaningful appeals process. The harm from a false positive in a system like this isn't a minor inconvenience, it's potentially catastrophic and irreversible.
And then there's the infrastructure problem. The Patriot Act is, once again, the prime example. You build the architecture for one stated purpose and then it gets legislated into something broader. Age verification is the live example happening right now. It started as self-attestation. That wasn't sufficient so it became on-device ID verification. That wasn't sufficient so it became third party trusted providers. Private vendors like Persona and kID. Both of which have had documented breaches after promising on-device verification themselves. This is literally the documented trajectory of every surveillance infrastructure built in the name of protection.
It's never a matter of if they legislate it further. It's when. And who profits from the expanded version.
Idiot's in Ties are still Idiots.
It would be so fun if Apple and Google decided they'd rather not have business in England anymore
It actually shows that the government have no understanding of the technology or the culture because no one's communicating with potential paedophiles via iMessage does Google even have a messaging app anymore?
Google does have a text message app. I use it because the native Samsung one looked ass
Textra is a good SMS app. I haven't looked st their privacy practices, but SMS in general is not private
The newest announced apple updates seem to handle most of these issues.
He knows this is impossible lol
That's what i'm concerned about.
Politicians are usually completely fucking clueless about the nuances of technology, but there’s something in the water in the UK that seems to make their pols reach for the stars in that regard.
Covering for Peter Mandelson with a “save our children” campaign
How?
That seems like a parent problem.
He's just Starmer alright. We have no control over him he just does stuff.
It's clear they haven't consulted anyone over this. All they did was told it was impossible and ignored them as per.
And it will only cost everyone all their privacy, right? Fucking fascists.
Obviously protecting children must always be a priority, the issue with this is, is that tech companies will understandably go for the easier option: force age verification system wide, without it, the OS might be extremely limited, and this opens a whole new can of worms IMO.
No it really doesn't have to always be. Protecting children should be balanced against harm to the rest of society. The vast majority of children will thankfully go on to live far more as non-children.
I wasn’t exclusively and aggressively prioritizing children safety over everything else, I was just highlighting the fact that it’s very important and should be correctly prioritized and not in a unilateral way.
And collect data on everyone including children while pointing to the law and saying that have to which enriches them more and more as time goes on.
They aren't even going to fight it. The like the idea of being able to gather more information on people. They'll say "it's just to make sure they aren't of age yet so we can keep them safe until we can legally show them ads and stuff that they're no longer protected from". They aren't fighting against laws like this. They're lobbying for them.
Not that it's a good thing but don't either of these companies have enough leverage to refuse with practically zero consequences?
4chan didn't care because of the absurd logic and they still haven't been blocked because they know it would be stupid to do so.
Nah. They haven't been blocked because the entire site is based on anonymity and the whole of their business operations don't involve the country in question.
How do you moderate a site when most of the user base are anonymous and don't sign up for accounts? There's nothing to link them back to. How do you prove a child sent anything or received anything with no account? How do you build a paper trail that would support the case against 4chan?
@deliriousdreams
moderate them by banning IPs, banning posts with VPNs, Tor and residential proxies from posting.
I guess you cant prove a child sent anything if they never imply their age in any post, they just have to never slip up.
I dont know if you need a paper trail against a website that just refuses to comply with laws. i dont know how UK laws work though. it is suprising 4chan isnt banned yet
@themachinestops @mlg
Google actually already has a system to automatically detect and filter incoming nude pictures. It allows apps to blur then and you can then opt to view them. It's a separate application and uses locally running machine learning.
I can't remember the name of it and if it's just on Pixels, nor what applications it works with. Might just be for their own messaging apps or it might be more deeply integrated. If anyone is curious I'll try to look it up after work.
The point is they already have something similar to this they could maybe leverage.
Apple has the same system, just FYI.
That's not what it does
We must protect the sausages with the Sausage Safety Act!
How much he gives to his own citizens human trafficking kids from albania?
wouldnt it be so funny if polaroid cameras made a huge comeback? i already fight the urge to buy one when i see shit like this
OP do you know how technology works? Apple and google already do this to a degree. We've seen people get reported to the police for taking pictures of their own kids nude because photos are scanned on upload to icloud or google's photos. This isnt new its an expansion of existing norms
Dude everyone is aware that Google scans google drive, it is not your own cloud naturally they can do what they want with it. If you store your data on someone else's server naturally they can see what you store. We are taking about devices you own with android and ios this is completely different.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-plans-to-stop-children-taking-sharing-or-viewing-nude-images Britain will become the first country in the world where it is impossible for children to take, share or view naked pictures on their devices.
Apple already has the capability to alert parents if a nude photo is detected. They do this detection on-device.
https://support.apple.com/en-ca/105069
Only for apple apps, it doesn't scan the entire device.
Messages, FaceTime, and AirDrop
Google has something similar I believe for Google Messages
Also they have to verify if the person using the device is a child if they want to implement this on the entire device.
How is it different you have absolutely no idea how this will be implemented. Currently IOS and Android default to cloud storage and we know how many users stray away from the defaults. Both devices already check your photos against the CSAM database and scan your local photos so you can search via tags like "cat" and it shows all cat photos. Who knows, it may be local AI and completely private.
I do agree that most people probably don't change the defaults, but I believe that apple stopped the scan for CSAM years ago on iCloud.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/08/tech/apple-csam-tool
Also you forgot to account for apps like Signal which store the photos encrypted in their own database.
This is not as simple as scanned photos, currently apple for example can do this locally on their own apps. The problem is apps like signal.
Strictly by the description it should include websites too, and would have to be extremely low level to prevent viewing.
Also Nintendo should probably be concerned at how widely the law is written for the DS
Isn’t he an Epstein pedophile?
Sure, give them 3 months to finish posting child diddy images, instead of idk, NOW. A week or two max, followed by forced liquidation.
Living up to your username at least.
Heck they need 3 months to stop committing crimes? If I went murdering people, they would not give me 3 months to stop, they would hunt me down like a dog.
Though tbf "underage people sharing nudes with each other on snapchat and looking at porn" doesn't necessarily mean you have to kill the children immediately, you can give them some time.
Besides, it's "you have three months to create and implement code that tracks the ages of all your users and all activity across all apps for the ones under 18, and then use that to stop their cameras from working when nudity detected, and stop their messaging services when nudity detected, and stop their internet when pornography detected." I don't think we need the follow up "lethal force engaged" just yet, but you never know they may start blowing up computers like Mossad's pagers when a kid googles "boobies" soon enough.
I mean, I said Liquidate the company. What can you do, teens can be teens, it's kind of like animals breeding. You are not supposed to breed the animals yourself. Also, they might hurt each other, so you should at least try to avoid situations where they will, or get them protection (so sex ed is a thing for that reason).
But I have a hard time believing companies about anything, and I give them little benefit of doubt.
When you put it like that: Age verification, checking the nudes of minors using code gained from Arceus knows what, it does sound a bit...unreasonable.
The idea is good but even with ai measures minors can easily fake an ai face id verification. I don't think it's possible to prevent 100% of cases.
But hopefully if this actual results in the ai tech improving at preventing a over whelming majority of kids faking their ages it would be extremely rare. If not.. the amount of fines tech companies might risk facing could potentially bankrupt them if too many kept sneeking past the ai and the gov acted against Google for that. the fines for that type of content isn't usually a small matter.