do i think that drinking age laws restrict access to drinking? well, yes, i do. if i consider the impact of going from “drinking age laws existing” to “no laws existing at all”… would i be surprised to see a surge in drinking sales for minors? no. its not magic, and it doesn’t fix society issues, but that doesn’t make drinking age laws wrong either.

agree, so the idea is ok but the way they are going about it sucks. what are some fixes?

yeah understood. the intention is good but concerns exist re implementation. what are some other approaches that could he used?

yeah we need to do something about it, and people seem to be trying their best to come up with bullshit arguments against it. “people will find ways around it” and then saying not to bother etc i mean, people under 18 sneak into clubs and get beer… or maybe fake an ID and hit a pub… or get an older friend to do something for them… it doesnt stop us as a society holding a view that under age drinking isnt great, and we make some effort to enforce that even if its not perfect.

people show ID to get into a bar, doesn’t feel that far away from this. its not a substitute for parenting , though it is another layer

thorium is nuclear too… (and doesnt seem to have the same runaway problems!)

how so?

i didnt see any other post so its good for me… pretty strong reaction when you could’ve just scrolled on by… hope you’re ok.

and yet, we adapt and we learn…

lets just hold the line of “the answer is always username/password + second factor”.

could be username/password + totp…

could be username/password + passkey…

if someone figures out my password, i dont lose everything…

if someone steals my passkey, i dont lose everything…

even if i do use the same password for everything, the second factor has it covered.

(nobody will ever guess my password of ******** anyway!)

no. just… no.

(fuck)

please stop fucking with the delicate balance of nature, its the only nature i’ve found that works for me

looks like it was moved outside the environment.

nope

sure, totally ok to incorporate those video items & publish your (signed) story. i think we’ve seen pretty clesrly that people want to publish and be recognised for their publications. building a web of trust has to start somewhere. currently we’re in the “its all very difficult, we cant solve all the tricky things, so we’re not even trying” stage. hopefully we find a way to move forward, even if its not perfect.

i think the point is to be able to say “this video was released by X, and X signed it so they must have released it, and you can validate that yourself”. it means if you see a logo that shows CNN, and its signed by CNN, then you know for sure that CNN released it. As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc, but they can at least be held to account at that point. versus random ai generated video with a fake logo and fake attribution that is going viral and not being able to be discredited in time before it becomes truth.

maybe? was just trying to provide specific alternatives with a concrete example

… so make the phones do it?

i mean, its not rocket surgery.

so try again? also: if a pixel changes then it isn’t the original source video, by definition. being able to determine that it has been altered is entirely the point.

videos need to be cryptographically signed and able to be verified. all news outlets should do this.