104
UK proposes selfie-based, AI age verification system for porn sites (www.techspot.com)
submitted 11 months ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/privacyguides@lemmy.one
41 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 73 points 11 months ago

There is a 0% chance that AI can accurately determine if someone is 18 or not, even with hypothetical futuristic AI technology. Some 20-year-olds look very young. Some 16-year-olds look shockingly old. And nobody changes very significantly between the day of their 18th birthday and the day they were 17 years, 364 days.

[-] jlow@beehaw.org 4 points 11 months ago

To quote the Simpsons: "0% is a percentage as well!" And that will be more than enough for politicians who know nothing about the topic and are blinded by the hot tech-buzzword of the minute (especially if it turns out they or some of their friends can make a shitload of money with it. I love capitalism and democracy.)

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 3 points 11 months ago

As an outside observer, UK politicians (even Conservatives) seem to tend to be a bit better at this sort of thing than American or Australian ("the laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia") politicians. There's a much stronger tendency for their back benchers to vote against the party line than we have, too, which is great for deliberative democracy.

[-] platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Exactly, this is something that even humans would have a hard time doing. Even though AI can do many things better than humans, humans are better at vision at the moment.

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 11 months ago

humans are better at vision at the moment

Eh, humans are better at certain kinds of vision—particularly on tasks that deal with non-white people where the AI was trained mostly on white people.

But things where the vision is looking at very fine detail, AI is very good at. Like determining if a patient has a disease based on a retinal scan or other medical imagery.

And I think it's fair to say that, at least superficially, the problem in this thread seems like it might be more similar to those medical cases where an AI could do a really good job. The problem is that actually, no. There's no known marker that could determine age with the level of accuracy that would be required for this task.

[-] platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Agreed.

Anyways, still a very stupid idea. People can pick an old person's selfie in the internet. Whoever proposed that is really dumb.

[-] Resistentialism@feddit.uk 2 points 11 months ago

Hell, even 13-15 year olds are looking much older. I genuinely saw one in normal clothes, took a guess based on her being around maybe 20. Saw her a day later in school uniform. And only under 16's wear them.

Really did make me realise I am shit at age guessing.

[-] kakes@sh.itjust.works 34 points 11 months ago

Surely this won't block lots of legitimate users, while simultaneously being trivially easy to bypass by submitting a picture of literally anyone.

[-] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 23 points 11 months ago

But it's so much more than that. It's a privacy nightmare in general and a boon for anyone interested in blackmail.

Totally gonna work this time though.

Such a complicated series of tubes, ye olde internet.

[-] taladar@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

Not to mention it is all based on the questionable assumption that porn is somehow harmful for teens to watch but the exact same porn is not harmful for adults.

[-] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

Adults don't watch porn though they look at pictures of Tractors

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 11 months ago

I'm just gonna submit pictures of him and Cameron. See how they like it.

[-] momocchi@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

Simply AI generate an adult face, it’ll be AI the whole way down

[-] Kalkaline@leminal.space 15 points 11 months ago

Or alternatively send a dick pic, if they are underage, now they're in possession of child porn, congrats you played yourself.

[-] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 12 points 11 months ago

Nah. then they will charge the child (and try them as a adult...) for distributing child porn images.

[-] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago

I swear I've read a similar headline a while ago of some teen being charged for that, because they sent nude selfies of themselves.

[-] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago

That is where I got the (fucked up) idea from.

IIRC: In USA. Teen sent nude pic to his girlfriend, both 16. He was charged with distributing child porn and put on a sex offender register for life.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 6 points 11 months ago

USA is determined to out stupid every other country on earth isn't it.

[-] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago

I wonder how they'd handle some families photo albums.

[-] cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

a child bathing naked isnt neccessarily csam, really depends on the nature of the picture

[-] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

Neither is a teen freely sending a nude selfie of themselves to their teen SO.
Many family photo albums feature naked kids in various stupid situations that were just thought to be cute and funny at the time, which would nowadays melt peoples brains if they'd hear about it, and certainly would fall under the same laws that would punish the teen in the other example.

[-] cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

the big difference here is that the child bathing doesnt have any sexual intent, while the teen selfie does

[-] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago

I can have some sexual intend on photos of naked children bathing too. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That's not really how those laws work though.

[-] dgmib@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago

‘cause if there’s one demographic that couldn’t possibly have the aptitude, resourcefulness or motivation needed to defeat a scheme like this it’s horny teenagers.

[-] Cliffjumper@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Sales of fake moustaches are gonna skyrocket

[-] amio@kbin.social 26 points 11 months ago

The UK should stick to things they know, like tea, comedy shows, fox hunting, and unelected MPs.

[-] platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

What about giving money to the royal family because of reasons?

[-] chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de 22 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The government says selfies for AI verification are to "protect" children from such content but in reality we know it's all to create a database with biometric hashes of everyone and create the long-awaited dystopia of 24/7 mass surveillance. The government that completes the task first comes out ahead, and it seems that China is winning the dispute

[-] LWD@lemm.ee 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

deleted

[-] DroneRights@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

And since this is the UK we're talking about, you know they're gonna use that data to track who's trans and persecute them

[-] Xariphon@kbin.social 15 points 11 months ago

I hate this timeline.

[-] root@aussie.zone 15 points 11 months ago

Wonder if 80% of the images submitted will be photos of Zuckerburg

[-] Drusenija@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Maybe they can use all those sexy pictures of John Oliver that got posted in protest over at Reddit.

[-] Gazumi@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

And so the last steps to privacy are removed.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 8 points 11 months ago

What's the porn site going to do when AI determines that a 15 year old is over 18?

"Judge, I swear the AI said she was 18!"

[-] sqgl@beehaw.org 7 points 11 months ago

Soon they will be wanting dick pics.

[-] jlow@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago

I'd actually have less qualms with that then sending a porn site my face. It's amazing that they think this will go down well.

[-] nutbutter@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 11 months ago

time to buy a fake mustache hehe

[-] fadhl3y@lemmy.one 1 points 10 months ago

Classic - clearly some British politicians have shares in a facial AI company.

this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
104 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy Guides

16263 readers
3 users here now

In the digital age, protecting your personal information might seem like an impossible task. We’re here to help.

This is a community for sharing news about privacy, posting information about cool privacy tools and services, and getting advice about your privacy journey.

You can subscribe to this community from any Kbin or Lemmy instance:

Learn more...

Check out our website at privacyguides.org before asking your questions here. We've tried answering the common questions and recommendations there!

Want to get involved? The website is open-source on GitHub, and your help would be appreciated!

This community is the "official" Privacy Guides community on Lemmy, which can be verified here. Other "Privacy Guides" communities on other Lemmy servers are not moderated by this team or associated with the website.

Moderation Rules:

  1. We prefer posting about open-source software whenever possible.
  2. This is not the place for self-promotion if you are not listed on privacyguides.org. If you want to be listed, make a suggestion on our forum first.
  3. No soliciting engagement: Don't ask for upvotes, follows, etc.
  4. Surveys, Fundraising, and Petitions must be pre-approved by the mod team.
  5. Be civil, no violence, hate speech. Assume people here are posting in good faith.
  6. Don't repost topics which have already been covered here.
  7. News posts must be related to privacy and security, and your post title must match the article headline exactly. Do not editorialize titles, you can post your opinions in the post body or a comment.
  8. Memes/images/video posts that could be summarized as text explanations should not be posted. Infographics and conference talks from reputable sources are acceptable.
  9. No help vampires: This is not a tech support subreddit, don't abuse our community's willingness to help. Questions related to privacy, security or privacy/security related software and their configurations are acceptable.
  10. No misinformation: Extraordinary claims must be matched with evidence.
  11. Do not post about VPNs or cryptocurrencies which are not listed on privacyguides.org. See Rule 2 for info on adding new recommendations to the website.
  12. General guides or software lists are not permitted. Original sources and research about specific topics are allowed as long as they are high quality and factual. We are not providing a platform for poorly-vetted, out-of-date or conflicting recommendations.

Additional Resources:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
jonah@lemmy.one
dngray@lemmy.one
freddy@lemmy.one
ninchuka@lemmy.one
jonah@lemmy.jonaharagon.net