Comment by ViktorRay
10 days ago
At the time this comment was posted there was only one other comment in this entire thread.
You say “so many people are advocating for this in HN” but this thread was empty except for one other comment (which was also critical of this) at the time you posted your comment.
I think if you use critical thinking to read you may easily find I'm talking about my experience with reading comments in relation to imposing age verification for online access, which means digital ID for internet access.
HN and even the GitHub comments mostly start with the assumption that of course we should do this. Of course we should restrict social media to under 16/18s and either are in favor of ID to access the Internet or pretend it won't happen by consequence of this.
Now try to address what I said instead of poorly calling me out.
Linking to some comments in favour of this might help your case.
It's been a relatively common position to find, at least before the most recent hubbub around Steam, Itch.io, Britain, etc. For instance, while https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42076302, ...
Or at the very least, many here support the goal of keeping children and/or teenagers off of social media entirely, while disliking the means of ID verification. But it's not like there's any other obvious means.
1 reply →
My case? What's YOUR case. Assert a position and provide proof in triplicate please.
Please tell me exactly what you think and I can nitpick it vaguely instead of putting forth mine. Heh.
In any case, just look at the comments under my comment. You'll see them.
- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44705630 (this is good, we need this). - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44705597 (are you a conservative?! Anonymity should be reduced.)
Don't be disingenuous with your proof demands and tell us what you think and then we can discuss the merits of your argument.
3 replies →