I think the idea that it’s a trust issue is broadly correct. “Free vibe-coded anonymous Linux server with root access” immediately causes every infrastructure and security neuron in my body to fire at once.
Broadly I agree that you can’t expect organizations to change their behaviour without changing the incentives. That’s essentially my argument in favour of the platform accountability portions of the bill.
Where I disagree is the framing that it’s a binary between “age verification for all” or “legal liability for parents”. There is a third option: change the incentives for the organizations designing and operating the systems children are using.
Regulate recommender systems, addictive defaults, reporting and appeal mechanisms, non-consensual intimate imagery response, synthetic sexual abuse material, dark patterns, safety plans, transparency, audits, and penalties for platforms that fail to respond properly. Those are all aimed at the organizations creating or amplifying the harm. This is, admittedly, the most difficult approach, but it’s also the approach that actually addresses the root cause.
My concern is that an under-16 account ban turns the enforcement problem into an age-assurance problem for all users. The platform has to determine who is under 16 somehow, which means assessing everyone’s age. That creates privacy and access-control infrastructure while the most vulnerable teenagers are also the ones most likely to route around it.
So yes, change incentives. I just think the incentives should be aimed directly at platform conduct and design, not at making everyone prove they are old enough to participate online.
I’d be cautious about saying OpenBSD itself is directly affected. It really depends on if OpenBSD counts as an “electronic service provider”.
You do raise a pretty good point though, Canada has long benefited from being perceived as a relatively trustworthy jurisdiction. So even if OpenBSD themselves are out of scope, there is a negative reputational hit that will impact Canadian tech.
I agree with the principle that the internet has, for lack of a better word, gone to shit.
This isn’t the answer though. It’s not technically feasible and doesn’t actually address the problem.
Your falling into the classic software brain trap of thinking the solution to a social problem is a technical one, when that isn’t necessarily the case.
Wholeheartedly agree. I feel like we genuinely lost something when seemingly all writing turned from people genuinely sharing their thoughts to “what’s going to get the most engagement on substack”.
I’m genuinely confused as to why the speakers are baffled by the boos.
Everyone, and especially new grads constantly hear that AI is going to replace every job. And absolutely no one seems to be interested in answering the question of “okay, then what?”
Of course people are going to react negatively when they hear, “the machines are going to take your jobs from you. No, we don’t care how you’ll be able to pay your rent or put food on the table”.
I'm not quite sure what being a leftie has to do with the point you're making. This isn't really a political point and more the valid (though not particularly novel) view that "most websites are overcomplicated".
> Writing the simplest of websites requires a ton of tooling now.
Meanwhile my website personal website is nothing but markdown files that get rendered into static HTML with a little bit of CSS. You really don't need a massive JS framework for a simple website.