The UK's war on anonymity has come to America
Governments in the US and UK are increasingly tying online “child safety” to mandatory age verification and digital IDs, raising fears that anonymity on the internet will be functionally abolished. Commenters argue that these measures are being pushed by well-funded NGOs, tech and data-broker interests, and security agencies, and would expand state and corporate surveillance without actually fixing the harms of social media or porn for minors. Many advocate instead for stronger parental controls, regulation of addictive design and ad-tech, and privacy-preserving technical solutions, warning that once ID-gated infrastructure exists it will be repurposed for censorship and broad social control.
Child Safety as Political Rhetoric
- Many see “think of the children” as a well‑worn pretext to expand surveillance, censorship and corporate immunity rather than genuinely protect kids.
- Others push back that concerns about children’s exposure to social media, pornography, and addictive design are sincere and widely shared by parents and voters.
- Several note that opposing such laws invites bad‑faith smears (e.g., being painted as pro‑abuse), which makes political resistance harder.
Parental Controls vs Age Verification / Digital ID
- One camp argues we already have the right model: OS‑level parental controls, client‑side filtering, and better UX so non‑technical parents can actually use them.
- Another argues this has failed in practice: controls are hard to use, easily bypassed, and can’t solve peer‑pressure effects when “everyone else” is on social media.
- Strong opposition to mandatory ID scans and device attestation: viewed as creating a permanent identity layer that can later be expanded and abused.
Harms of Social Media and Modern Internet
- Broad agreement that engagement‑optimized feeds, infinite scroll, dark patterns, and algorithmic amplification harm both children and adults.
- Some think “fix social media” is futile; even “responsible” social platforms would still intensify bullying, FOMO, and status anxiety among teens.
- Others call for banning specific harmful design patterns (e.g., infinite scroll, late‑night push notifications) for all users, not just minors.
Privacy, Surveillance, and Slippery Slopes
- Many fear a “panopticon” trajectory: OS age fields today, mandatory verification and hardware attestation tomorrow, integrated with broader surveillance (ALPRs, cameras, etc.).
- There’s debate over “slippery slope” reasoning: some say history justifies it; others warn against assuming society can’t adapt or add safeguards.
Role of NGOs, Corporations, and Lobbying
- Multiple commenters allege that “child safety” NGOs are heavily funded by platforms and data brokers seeking cheaper moderation, liability shifts, and new ID markets.
- The UK’s 5Rights and similar groups are cited as templates being exported to US states; some see this as foreign influence, others as parallel domestic trends.
Alternative Solutions Discussed
- Client‑side content labeling and filtering (RTA‑style headers) with easy device‑level “child mode.”
- Antitrust to open locked‑down mobile ecosystems so specialized “kid OSes” could exist.
- Stronger regulation of ad‑tech and data brokerage rather than age‑gating everything.
Parental Responsibility and Social Trade‑offs
- Disagreement over whether the primary fix is “better parenting” or structural regulation.
- Some accept loss of some adult freedoms to protect kids; others say no child‑safety benefit justifies building universal identity and tracking infrastructure.