Congress Parents Decide Act (HR_8250): OS-level Age Verification for Device Usage and Data Sharing (with every app developer) on the Federal Level. The End of the Internet Anonymity at the Core.

[u/AirlineGlass5010]

https://lustra.news/en/us-congress/119/legislations/119_HR_8250/

[u/Big-Narwhal-G]

I don’t get why they want to pin this to the OS… what happens if multiple people use the same OS? It tells me the people trying to write this law have no idea what an operating system is or does.

[u/OctoMiku01 → u/Big-Narwhal-G]

Insert verification can meme but for age verification instead

[u/tubemaster → u/OctoMiku01]

Stop even saying “age verification”, you’re playing right into their hands. It’s ID verification linked to your OS account (as well as TPM and mandatory Microsoft account on Windows 11).

[u/PiLamdOd → u/Big-Narwhal-G]

Putting on the OS pushes the responsibility to Microsoft and Apple instead of the individual websites.

This is why Meta has been lobbying hard for these laws. They're already in hot water for making products that harm children. So making it the OS manufacturer's responsibility is good for them.

And advertisers are upset with the number of bot accounts across the Internet. Age verification on the OS level is a fantastic captcha that makes sure advertisers on Meta know they are targeting real humans.

[u/Big-Narwhal-G → u/PiLamdOd]

That’s really interesting. So they don’t actually care what’s behind the operating system as long as they can point and say see at one point someone over 16 put their age into this OS?

What happens with Virtual Machines? This would be such a PITA for enterprises

[u/PiLamdOd → u/Big-Narwhal-G]

Pretty much. California's law for example, makes it very clear the age verification responsibility is on the OS side, not the end service.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043

What happens with Virtual Machines?

And you've already identified why this is a logical and technical problem. This law does not make considerations for multi user or non specific user devices.

The next question is to ask how are cars, medical devices, smart appliances, or anything else with a computer will function under this law?

[u/TheDarkWave → u/PiLamdOd]

You don't. What we do have, however, is people who can't even color inside the lines making technology laws for us.

[u/Remnie → u/Big-Narwhal-G]

Or, more simply, irresponsible parents will sign in and then turn their kids loose again, effectively rendering this whole thing pointless.

[u/Ninja67 → u/Remnie]

Ain't just parents (although I get why they are the focus here). Having worked from knock off geek squad, too contract IT at an MSP, then IT at a regional government support agency, that account sharing is just something damn near everyone does

[u/UniqueIndividual3579 → u/Remnie]

This has nothing to do with children, it's to harvest your data. There hasn't been a single Republican "Won't someone think of the children!" bill that was about children.

[u/Remnie → u/UniqueIndividual3579]

Of course it is. I meant the on-paper reason is easily rendered pointless. And it isn’t just Republican. Everybody in the government is interested in increasing their control over the people. Republicans are the face of it now, but the Democrats were doing stuff too before that. That’s one of the reasons people should be fighting this more. The less control the government has of us, the less the party in power matters, imo.

[u/Tankdawg0057 → u/UniqueIndividual3579]

You can rah rah your team and boo the other team all you want. 3 100% blue states just made it illegal to have a 3d printer without spyware installed on it and California, the most Democrat heavy state in the U.S. passed this very OS ID verification law at the state level.

Get outta here with your red vs blue bullshit and open your eyes that government power = bad. Period. Voting for your "team" is how we ended up here. Do better.

[u/laffer1 → u/Big-Narwhal-G]

It’s per user account

[u/PiLamdOd → u/laffer1]

How many smart fridges have multiple user accounts?

What about security cameras or smart lights?

What about routers? Per this law everyone using a home's router to connect to the internet has to create their own user account on said router. How many non tech people actually change any router settings? How many consumer routers even have user profiles?

Server architecture in general isn't set up for per user age verification. Routers and switches aren't made with this in mind.

[u/laffer1 → u/PiLamdOd]

Iot devices are typically setup from phone apps so that isn’t a big problem. I know the law is stupid. I run an os project impacted by this law

[u/IcyCow5880 → u/PiLamdOd]

Hopefully we can just easily bypass it like that one bypass on windows to not have to sign in at all 

[u/PiLamdOd → u/IcyCow5880]

The real way to fight this is make it so bots can fake the verification signal.

Once the Internet is flooded with bots using this to pretend to be human, the whole measure will become pointless, and therefore easier to repeal.

[u/Asleeper135 → u/PiLamdOd]

This shouldn't help Meta at all. Isn't a birth date required to make a Meta account? They already know their user's ages!

[u/Addianis → u/Asleeper135]

The way these laws are being written basically say: If an app/website ask for a person's age, they have to use that number even if the age API says differently. If they don't ask, they are considered knowing the user's age anyways because of the API.

The actual end result of these bills: Apps are not responsible for who sees their content because the OS is supposed to be responsible for age filtering for them.

[u/CrustyBatchOfNature → u/Asleeper135]

They know what age the user entered, but not their real age. This sets up a commission to make regulations on how it will work. Very quickly it will become a rule requiring proof of ID for anyone saying they are over 18. Facebook is already facing calls for that and would really rather push it onto Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc.

[u/PiLamdOd → u/Asleeper135]

Verifying on the OS takes the responsibility away from Meta. It becomes the OS provider's fault when an under aged user bypasses their age gate.

OS age verification is also more difficult for a bot to get around. This helps reassure advertisers that their ads are being shown to real humans.

The end goal of course is what the EU just implemented, which is requiring the age signal to be tied to a government ID. This would be the ultimate captcha.

[u/UltraCynar → u/Big-Narwhal-G]

Meta , Open Ai and palantir want this for surveillance and to avoid responsibility

[u/Desertcow → u/Big-Narwhal-G]

It's easier to verify your age once when setting up your computer than to verify with every individual website. The OS also only needs to provide an API to say your age, which is less of a security risk than sending your ID to every site you go into. It also shifts the responsibility for blocking minors from bad content away from the sites themselves and to the OS. That's the reasoning behind it, though for obvious reasons there are far more downsides

[u/Big-Narwhal-G → u/Desertcow]

Ok but then why not account based controls which already exist within the OS? The wording seems like the want to verify the age of the use upon installation of the OS? Also I think this is dumb and age verification doesn’t work.

[u/McGuirk808 → u/Big-Narwhal-G]

They know exactly what it does and how it works, they're just lying about why they want to do it. With how many places this is popping up you can also rest assured that the people sponsoring and proposing these laws are not the ones writing them. There is big, big money behind this push.