Not sharing Johnson’s hopefulness, Goldman wrote that “there is no ‘priority’ or ‘ideal’ way of verifying online age.” He advised that even a perfect system that accurately authenticity, it would be poor in it.
He wrote, “Rather, they fall on a spectrum of every kind of ‘one -way dangerous’,” he concluded that “every solution has serious confidentiality, accuracy or security issues.”
Children of “serious threat” from unaware rules
As a “growing age” age is swollen in the industry, Goldman wants to see more serious efforts by lawmakers for “wider and more deliberate tool cuts of online children’s safety measures.” He advised that he could advise the minors in the laws permanently, so it is clear who is being organized and who is banned. They can then educate parents and minors to help you get online losses.
Without such careful consideration, Goldman has predicted the Distopian future through age verification laws. If Scots supports them, users may be so accustomed to age door that they begin to enter sensitive information into different web platforms without thinking. Goldman said the government also knows that it will be a catastrophe.
Goldman wrote, “Governments around the world want to think that if people are stolen, people think twice before sharing sensitive biometric information due to instability.” “Confirmation of essential age teaches them opposing lessons.”
Goldman suggests that legislators began to find a solution based on information about age verification issues rather than relying on tech to save the day.
Goldman wrote, “Treatment of online age verification challenges purely encourages technically non -cooperative beliefs that if its problems can be solved, if the fool of technicians is difficult.” “This redundant thinking is a double mistake. Age verification is basically an information issue, not a technology issue. Technology can help improve information accuracy and quality, but it cannot unilaterally solve the challenges of information.”
Legislatures can only minimize the risks for children through age verification when someone tries to access limited content or “to force ages to minimize their data collecting their data” and the collected “immediately tries to delete any highly sensitive information”. Goldman suggested that it does not prevent some shopkeepers from collecting or maintaining data anyway. But it can be a better standard to protect users of all ages from unavoidable data violations, because we know that “many authentic people have faced major data security failures that have put certified individuals in serious risk.”
Goldman wrote, “If the purpose of the policy is to protect minors online because of their potential weakness, it is a policy failure to force the minor to decide whether to share highly sensitive information with online strangers.” “Child Safety Online needs a full response to the Society, not representative and pre -approach.”