It’s been a few weeks since the Internet Safety Technical Task Force released its Final Report and the media coverage keeps coming. It’s no secret that IDology had some comments/objections with the Final Report which apparently from this article in the Wall Street Journal so did the Attorneys General. You might also want to check out this Washington Post article which also gives an overview to some of the controversy over the Final Report including disagreements from other Task Force members who aren’t involved with providing identity and age verification solutions in case you might find our opinion biased.
Some of the articles I’ve read discuss “age verification” as “not offering substantial help in protecting minors from sexual solicitation.” I think it’s important to stress that the evaluation of “age verification” that the Task Force’s Technical Advisory Board conducted included many solutions classified as “age verification” technologies including a biometric device and also a vetting process that included schools and the information on their students. As you read articles or see people speaking on the subject of age verification, be careful to recognize that in many cases the issues they are discussing are based on attempts to age verify a minor, which our solution is not designed to do. Remember that the data available on minors is strictly protected. Which is why we suggested the walled garden approach – because age and identity verification can be (and is already) used to verify anyone 18 or older.
Creating distinct communities for minors and adults is a logical step that Social Networks have already done. They just need to enforce it and the first step toward enforcement is starting to verify the id and age of their adult members.