Sidechat icon
Join communities on Sidechat Download
hmmmmmmmmm
221 upvotes, 17 comments. Sidechat image post by Anonymous in US Politics. "hmmmmmmmmm"
upvote 221 downvote

default user profile icon
Anonymous 1d

I’d vote no too. The only way to enforce this is to require all those using chat gpt etc to upload IDs to prove they are adults. Do you want all chat gpt conversations even those not sexual to be linked to Your ID?

upvote 54 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 20h

Better that than porno tube sites....

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 22h

Don’t ask the AI illegal shit and it doesn’t matter

upvote -5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 22h

Bruh you cannot be serious with that take

upvote 21 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #4 22h

I’ll see you in the Peter Thiel work camps

upvote 13 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 21h

Just add a banner that says “18+” no need for id verification It’s ineffective but it would at least clearly allow for content filtering like “hey my account is set for no NSFW so my chatbot will not allow that by default”

upvote 14 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #4 21h

So much shit is always linked to ur ID why does it matter if ai is

upvote -3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 21h

Protecting children is the priority

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 20h

Dawg we want less stuff to be linked to our ID We dont want our ID in a database more then it already is .

upvote 22 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 20h

Tracking children’s identification and browsing data is not protecting children

upvote 13 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 20h

Any AI programmed to say sexually explicit things should require ID that doesn’t mean all AI has to lmao. Like ChatGPT will not speak sexually, and you can program it not to so it is completely possible.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 17h

That’s absolutely not true. Device-attested age verification can do this without exposing you to privacy risks. The real problem is that we haven’t mandated device-attested age verification yet

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #8 16h

That most definitely has its own issues lol Even the age API bill is an issue, good luck figuring out how to do that on LFS or say, the operating system your car uses. Do you now have to put in your age to use a smart fridge? A TV? I get that’s targeted at windows and macOS but the device age verification is kinda fundamentally at odds with Linux

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #5 16h

It doesn’t have to implicate any of that. Age attestation is fundamentally a transaction-oriented process; you don’t have to mandate that every device knows your age, you can mandate that age-sensitive services check your age attestation. If it’s not available, you simply don’t get that service on that device

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #8 16h

On a lot of GNU/Linux distros, the idea is that there’s fundamentally no way to stop someone from mocking/faking that transaction.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #8 16h

My issue is that they are mandating that every device knows your age RIGHT NOW in California in 2027 It just doesn’t make sense for Linux, sure they can add it to desktop distros but yeah there’s no way to guarantee authenticity, by design

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #5 16h

You’ve gotta accept that Linux almost certainly won’t be able to participate in this process. There are methods for proving authenticity, but they do rely on a combination of hardware and software. To me, that’s a very small trade off

upvote 1 downvote