Steam now requires ages verification for adult games.

[Count Morado]

The problem isn't that the internet should be exempt, the problem is getting ID'd in person doesn't result in all your personal private information being permanently stored in a database begging to be leaked or maybe even sold.

Then what exactly is the point of age verification? "Content/product only meant for adults" is just another way of saying content not meant for non-adults; i.e. protecting the kids. That won't even stop underage people anyway the same way that your repeated examples of getting ID'd in person didn't stop underage people from seeing porn or getting alcohol etc...

By adding these age checks from ID or even credit card, you're now restricting access from people who have a legal right to it. Not everyone has a credit card and you should never be saving your payment information anyway; and not everyone will agree to share their ID online because they don't trust it. That's not a problem in person because sales clerks aren't snapping a photo of your ID or credit card and saving it.

I've already stated credit card is not the way to go. But it may be one of the few ways we have until something becomes standardized.

I've already mentionedy state's mobile ID. There's a similar app possible with passports. While I am not saying this is the way it must be done in the future, one idea could be to having a site ping an agency or vendor who has access to that data, combined with a biometric component (to prove that the person saying the id is theirs, actually is them) and the agency answering simply with an affirmative or negative.

Also, as for your sales clerk example --- I don't know about where you live, but in my area --- they electronically scan the cards, so as not to rely on humans to do the math. The register won't allow a sale without the scan. When scanned, that data can be captured.

To have NO age check until something becomes industry standard for online verification is not viable.

If you don't want to share... Then use the sites you are already using such as F95 to get your adult materials.

 

[BETiLose34]

Prove is the verb; proof is the noun. In order to prove you are of age, you must supply proof such as a government issued id.

No, it's not a false equivalence. It's setting a foundation for the argument. If one does not know where the other stands on the issue, then meaningful argument cannot ensue

So, in the end - we are in agreement that people should provide proof of their age to prove they are old enough to access adult-only products, content, services.

I don't give a flying fuck about your feelings of disappointment. I'm not here to impress you nor to even engage in a conversation with you.

Cool never said you had to care? But you are here arguing with people in an attempt to correct them, and you did engage me, and nope you didn't and still dont have to engage me but don't be surprised when I call out your shitty arguments and tactics you use.

as rutonat already said "Because you refuse to engage with any argument that doesn't make you sound like you're right, but you're very much happy to accuse others to be conspiracy nutjobs and immature if they don't agree with you."

"So, in the end - we are in agreement that people should provide proof of their age to prove they are old enough to access adult-only products, content, services. "

If you actually read my post you'd know I never argued against providing proof of their age, im arguing against the way this is being implemented. BTW Date of Birth input was considered proof of age online up until now.

But you do you and keep sticking to the same strategy of ignoring anything inconvenient to your position, I honestly don't give a fuck about convincing you, as I said in my first post this is about making sure others can see how easily your positions fall apart under even alittle pressure.

 

[Count Morado]

Cool never said you had to care? But you are here arguing with people in an attempt to correct them, and you did engage me, and nope you didn't and still dont have to engage me but don't be surprised when I call out your shitty arguments and tactics you use.

as rutonat already said "Because you refuse to engage with any argument that doesn't make you sound like you're right, but you're very much happy to accuse others to be conspiracy nutjobs and immature if they don't agree with you."

"So, in the end - we are in agreement that people should provide proof of their age to prove they are old enough to access adult-only products, content, services. "

If you actually read my post you'd know I never argued against providing proof of their age, im arguing against the way this is being implemented. BTW Date of Birth input was considered proof of age online up until now.

But you do you and keep sticking to the same strategy of ignoring anything inconvenient to your position, I honestly don't give a fuck about convincing you, as I said in my first post this is about making sure others can see how easily your positions fall apart under even alittle pressure.

No, I do not ignore.

You seem to miss the fact that I, too, think the way it is being implemented is not a good way. Again, we are in agreement.

However, until an industry standard is set - there will be inefficient ways and ways which have more flaws than we would like.

Looking over my posts:

How would you recommend Steam verify age is over 18 for ADULT content?

Also, if this is UK-only (and other jurisdictions with similar laws), it means they are attempting to comply with the law.

notice how many offered ideas on how sites could comply.

Both credit card and email age lack as acceptable age verification online, in my opinion. just like an old t shirt, it has holes.

notice my dislike of using credit cards and email accounts

My posts have not said or implied to "throw the baby out with the bathwater." If you read them that way - that's your bias....

As I have stated - I don't think credit cards or email account age are ways to prove age being 18+ for adult purchases. Although I go against the liberal justices on SCOTUS - I do believe, unlike them, that proving age is necessary for accessing adult content legally. I actually side with conversative states and conservative SCOTUS justices in that people do need ID'd. I just do not think this way is the way to do it....

This thread was started by a person (and populated by people) who appear to believe that proving age is censorship. While it is limiting consumption - it is limiting it to people who can show they are of age to consume such content --- just like they would have to do in a brick-and-mortar store. I agree that proving age is necessary - I just don't think credit cards and email account age are the way to do so.

In the US, many states have gone to a system for "Mobile ID" - while children (and others) could still abuse it - using the "Mobile ID" with face recognition would be a viable (though costly) alternative.

Do I think credit card is a decent stop-gap? For now it can be. But a better solution needs to be considered.

notice my reiteration and one suggestion.

To have NO age check until something becomes industry standard for online verification is not viable.

Sites need to be in compliance with laws sooner, not later. And so they are stuck between a rock and a hard place with their choices. But they have to be in compliance and this is a way they chose. Some have chosen to shut off access to jurisdictions where they are unable to comply.

You arguing with me when it appears we are mainly in agreement is pointless.

Rutonat is the one who puts on the blinders. And, apparently, you, too.

 

[BETiLose34]

No, I do not ignore.

You seem to miss the fact that I, too, think the way it is being implemented is not a good way. Again, we are in agreement.

However, until an industry standard is set - there will be inefficient ways and ways which have more flaws than we would like.

Looking over my posts:
notice how many offered ideas on how sites could comply.
notice my dislike of using credit cards and email accounts
notice my reiteration and one suggestion.

You arguing with me when it appears we are mainly in agreement is pointless.

Rutonat is the one who puts on the blinders.

"However, until an industry standard is set - there will be inefficient ways and ways which have more flaws than we would like."

This is my problem, THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE IMPLEMENTED THIS IF THEY ARN'T PREPARED.

In my big post you ignored I literally stated the flaws with what they are doing, here is atleast a possible solution.

ZKP's-zero knowledge proofs

but they arn't ready, we have little to no protections for our privacy, little to no choice for the third party vendor, we have little to no protection against sites and states who implement age verification on a mass level.

This is a great article that goes into depth about them

You must be registered to see the links

Because of the supreme courts ruling they are now able to implement this method of age verification without needing to prove it's the most effective nor consider if this impedes on adults access to free speech.

What they should have done is set up laws to protect against data retention/selling, allowing trusted companies to set up an app or digital wallet, set up laws that make wide spread age verification illegal so they can only be enforced to stop minors from accessing "sexually explict content" so content that is protected and legal for minors to access isn't blocked. IE lgbt topics


Edit: I should mention there are negatives to ZKP's but to keep this short I'll direct you to the link if interested.

 

[Count Morado]

"However, until an industry standard is set - there will be inefficient ways and ways which have more flaws than we would like."

This is my problem, THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE IMPLEMENTED THIS IF THEY ARN'T PREPARED

If they implement nothing, they are in violation of the law. How hard is this to understand???

Either they violate the law or they implement something that puts them into compliance.

Everything else you post is moot.

We cannot go into the past and do things the way YOU think they should be done. Companies have to find a way to be in compliance with the law or be held accountable.

They either shut down access to jurisdictions where they are unable to comply or they find ways of being in compliance.

I am not arguing that this isn't perfect, BUT it is what we have.

That is how the world works. Live in it.

Again, as for your tangent into LGBTQIA+ --- IT IS NOT RELEVANT HERE! LGBTQIA+ topics are not being singled out by Steam. They ARE being singled out by conservatives in power in many jurisdictions... But censorship is not the topic here.

It is a completely separate topic which...AGAIN... we are likely to be in a lot of agreement with. But it has NOTHING to do with proving age.

If you want to talk about conservatives and Project 2025 aspirations .. there is a political thread for that.

 

[BETiLose34]

If they implement nothing, they are in violation of the law. How hard is this to understand???

Either they violate the law or they implement something that puts them into compliance.

Everything else you post is moot.

We cannot go into the past and do things the way YOU think they should be done. Companies have to find a way to be in compliance with the law or be held accountable.

They either shut down access to jurisdictions where they are unable to comply or they find ways of being in compliance.

I am not arguing that this isn't perfect, BUT it is what we have.

That is how the world works. Live in it.

Again, as for your tangent into LGBTQIA+ --- IT IS NOT RELEVANT HERE! LGBTQIA+ topics are not being singled out by Steam. They ARE being singled out by conservatives in power in many jurisdictions... But censorship is not the topic here.

It is a completely separate topic which...AGAIN... we are likely to be in a lot of agreement with. But it has NOTHING to do with proving age.

Omg go back to the first post I sent in response to what you said and reread what you were talking about. YOUR post that I responded to was not just about steam's new age verification.

"You want separate rules for the internet - but you have not shown any viable reason why the internet should have separate rules. And bringing forth a slippery slope argument about what you think might happen has no grounding if you have provided no foundation for such an argument. Which, you have not."

1. I have provided reasons why the internet should have separate rules
2. I have brought forth a slippery slope argument and posted reasons it is valid, such as conservatives using the "harmful to minors" to block access to content that isn't "sexually explicit" from minors.

This is 100% relevant there is absolutely no reason to believe that conservatives who believe lgbt books should be removed or restricted to adults in public libraries will stop when it comes to online spaces.

Since the very start of our discussion to now did I ever once mention steam? No because it wasn't relevant to the post YOU made that I responded to.

EDIT: Went back and looked at your post I responded to, and then followed that conversation you had with the previous guy. He also wasn't talking about steam and judging from your responses to both him and me I really don't think you were talking about steam either.

 

[Pretentious Goblin]

As usual, lawmakers are clueless and generally worthless. If I'm a British lad and I want to play some smut, I'm probably already pirating it, not buying it on Steam. What I'm concerned about is piracy and the dark web being the next targets for crackdown, and then it'll be literally like 1984, or communist China. If you've been around since the 90s, it hurts to see what's being done to the internet by power-hungry pricks who hate privacy and individual responsibility.

 

[anne O'nymous]

I just can't address it all at once.

It's funny how it's always your argument, whatever the subject, whatever who you're talking to.

 

[BETiLose34]

American adults lost a total of $43 billion to identity fraud in 2023

You must be registered to see the links

Congress can pass a bill in a few months or even faster if needed.

knowing these two things raises a question.

If the only purpose of these stricter age verification methods was protecting minors, and no other reason then why did they implement it this way?

We know that spreading out highly valuable personal information like state id's to more websites just increase the attack vectors available to hackers. This is likely to take what already is a massive cost on the economy and make it worst.

The cost to the porn industry might be massive as well. Atleast according to the sites that have implemented the new Age verification

Congress could make this future very unlikely with a bill that enforces strong privacy practices on third party companies who handle age verification.

Google already released their zkp as open source for others to use.

You must be registered to see the links

How zkp could work

User gets government id
User uploads id to third party company app/digital wallet
The app creates a User ID number + makes you create a password
The app verifies the User is 18+ and gets a * or user is 21+ gets **
If User is under 18 it will self delete User ID and user can try again when they turn 18+
The App deletes all unnecessary info (May need the date of birth and country of origin)
The app keeps track of date of birth of User who is 18+ til 21+ is reached then it deletes the date of birth
The user visits website and website request Age verification from the App
App sends either * or ** depending on the User's age

This method offers alot of positives, from having the strictness of State Id, while having very little information kept by the app or given to the website.

While knowing this is a future option that could work why did they focus instead on passing a very risky law?

Instead of focusing on setting up the proper protections with Data protection and working with app developers on making a zkp method of age verification. They decided it was instead better to make what at the time was an unconstitutional law that they had to spend millions on fighting it all the way to the supreme court.

Even if they said it was an emergency to get id verification online ASAP the time it took to make this bill and then fight it's way through the courts and then the time before it actually goes into effect I can't help but think they could have achieved this zkp method in the same time or very close to it. (especially if they were willing to invest the money they spent on the legal battle into it's development)

anyway some food for thought for you guys, it's probably obvious that I don't consider their argument of protecting children to be genuine at all.

 

[MLocke]

It's funny how it's always your argument, whatever the subject, whatever who you're talking to.

I said that because you are pretending like there's something I didn't address or that you are still right about something, but you aren't. It's really that bad. You don't even know what you are talking about, but you still always have something negative to say in these threads about gamers. It's pretty blatant.

And do you think you are someone who will believe they are wrong when you are told precisely and given a source to check? No, you need it broken down, and you will still try to find some logic or reinterpretation rather than a solid argument. It's grasping at straws. So, it's not worth it, and I think you know that. You are semi-reasonable, but you definitely have an odd attitude. Also, if you wanted to correct people and dig into arguments, you should really be doing it for the usual suspects (trolls) that come to these threads with complete nonsense. I think most people ignore them. They never let anyone say anything without getting into a long, rambling argument, but they are pretty much just hijackers with no clue.

 

[milfhunter3188]

i'm all for keeping mature things away from kids but it's really weird that only thing talked about is porn games on steam. it is super easy to find porn nowadays and kids are not fucking morons. they get super fast access to all porn with all the perversions that games have (maybe even more if you know where to look). who cares if it is performed by real people or animated people? if this is really about taking care about young people why not tackle the gambling problem on steam? only a few eu countries have banned it to my knowledge (let me know if i'm mistaken pls) and it is as serious of a problem as porn. i love valve as much as the next guy but those guys just making bank by being a gambling site lol.

 

[Jaike]

Quickish comment, but the idea underaged are illegally purchasing porn with their parents' cards just sounds so wtf to me. What the hell kind of society is that? I guarantee you that most kids are involuntarily exposed to porn on social media instead of online stores... and that kids understate how much they looked up voluntarily when they're asked by researchers or media. And that underage buyers (still wtf) trend older.

I can sorta see an argument for better age segregation for adult materials on mixed market places like Steam though. But it seems like disproportional to extend that to adult sites when there's no sign that is a major issue. That's relevant for places where proportionality is an important test.

I'm not a fan of all kinds of sites running their own age verification systems with unclear territoriality and all. That's a criminal's charter, and a licence for foreign goverments to spy on citizens, and if dumb systems like that leads to a predictable debacle of identity fraud or extortion or other crap there should be criminal sentences for criminals, and the responsible executive and legislative politicians and activist oligarchs. For limited applications I can see something in a national goverment run system that shares the minimal info that's needed as a workable compromise.

There are some good provisions in the SOA tho. Better filtering of adult content on social media is necessary, and unforgivable if the underaged users gave their age accurately. And letting an algorithm feed self harm videos to kids is just sick.

Overall it looks a bit like using 1 problem to overreach in at least 1 area that isn't strictly related.

 

[gabz787878]

Steam already has my CC, name, address, etc for purchases. I'm pretty much verified by default just as a user.

same here they have all my data, my city my house lol my bank ecc. I dont care about the fact that the gov sees my horny games im more afraid of speech censorship

 

[MissCougar]

i'm all for keeping mature things away from kids but it's really weird that only thing talked about is porn games on steam. it is super easy to find porn nowadays and kids are not fucking morons. they get super fast access to all porn with all the perversions that games have (maybe even more if you know where to look). who cares if it is performed by real people or animated people? if this is really about taking care about young people why not tackle the gambling problem on steam? only a few eu countries have banned it to my knowledge (let me know if i'm mistaken pls) and it is as serious of a problem as porn. i love valve as much as the next guy but those guys just making bank by being a gambling site lol.

I think it's mostly for getting into censorship with a section nobody wants to defend. Gaming is dumb to people and porn is dumb to people so it's the perfect gateway to get no politicians to defend it anywhere and it will pass because nobody wants to stand up against it.

 

[Anon4321]

I just learnt something, if you buy a mature rated game, for example Agony: Unrated from a site like Eneba (

You must be registered to see the links

) and get a key from them, it works
although, I doubt you can find any games from here on F95

 

[Goeffel]

As of the 29th Steam now requires ages verification to access adult games in the UK. The verification is done via credit card information. This is the latest in the cycle of attempted censorship of adult content in the UK.

wait, wut?

First, cc companies claim high morals and "no strange porn games, please!", and now you are required to make a contract with them fuckers to get any porn games?

...

Also makes you wonder if UK citizens are the better consumers. (like they definitely are with payTV-for-football)
With German age verification demands Steam was all "Nah, too much trouble ... bye bye" and just blocked any German IP/ account from accessing the porn content.

 

[iBedoMi]

That's exaggerated way beyond the point. Most online purchases are NOT abused. From groceries to clothes to movie tickets to ride sharing to vacations etc. etc. etc. they are also NOT illegal and almost all do NOT require BY LAW some sort of identification. Online purchasing will be just fine.

Plus "in person" isn't any better...

to be honest any citizen in any country should piss on their snitch LAWS always anti citizen these so calles laws… ridiciolous i even start pirating and seeding again like no tomorrow as i bend my knee to these corrupt fashist law makers hawk tuah

 

[morphnet]

to be honest any citizen in any country should piss on their snitch LAWS always anti citizen these so calles laws… ridiciolous i even start pirating and seeding again like no tomorrow as i bend my knee to these corrupt fashist law makers hawk tuah

 

[Anon4321]

What we feared the most
Age Verification Company Exposes User Data, Reinforcing Privacy Fears Over Digital ID Systems

You must be registered to see the links

 

[suprisedcrankyface]

American adults lost a total of $43 billion to identity fraud in 2023

What will happen (based on most historical laws/products/innovations/changes etc.).

Concept is conceived
Several organizations (companies/countries) attempt to implement the concept in varied ways
Massive failures/flaws result
A system that actually works stands out (or none do and it is a failure, either scrapped or returning to point 1)
That System gets copied as the new standard

We are currently in step 1, with the very early stages of step 2. If you are concerned just like with new tech or medicines don't go first, wait for steps 4/5.