Sam Altmann co founded that Blockchain company that paid crypto for your biometric data? Also, a joke: we're pondering orbs again? What is this, 2020 twitter?
Sam Altmann co founded that Blockchain company that paid crypto for your biometric data?
Also, a joke: we're pondering orbs again? What is this, 2020 twitter?
reddit is getting banned in France and a couple of other euro countries and some US states if they don't do age verification. I guess this is their solution.
reddit is getting banned in France and a couple of other euro countries and some US states if they don't do age verification. I guess this is their solution.
I really want to see what happens to a country that bans social media for children. It might work out really well but we need someone to take the lead. Edit: I got label-misuse downvoted for this...
I really want to see what happens to a country that bans social media for children. It might work out really well but we need someone to take the lead.
Edit: I got label-misuse downvoted for this comment? It's not off topic, a joke or noise.
Personally I think it should be parental responsibility, and I don't see how it would be legal in the US without having on undue burden on adults but I didn't think we would vote for trump either.
Personally I think it should be parental responsibility, and I don't see how it would be legal in the US without having on undue burden on adults but I didn't think we would vote for trump either.
I don't think it's necessarily the right approach from a liberty perspective. I just want to see what happens. There are some kids that don't want to be involved with social media but feel...
I don't think it's necessarily the right approach from a liberty perspective. I just want to see what happens. There are some kids that don't want to be involved with social media but feel obligated to partake. Maybe there are enough like that such that a ban would be really well received.
I remember seeing cigarette vending machines when I was kid. States started banning them in the '80's and '90's, but they weren't banned nationwide until 2010. I guess parental responsibility...
I remember seeing cigarette vending machines when I was kid. States started banning them in the '80's and '90's, but they weren't banned nationwide until 2010. I guess parental responsibility wasn't considered good enough? It can be quite hard for parents to fight cultural trends without backup from the rest of society.
I wonder how bad would it really be if signing up for certain websites had to be done in person, in a store?
Yeah I think I agree. I'm a new parent, Tildes is the only "social media" that I regularly use, I am staunchly opposed to its use by children, and I'm dreading having to navigate it with my own...
Yeah I think I agree. I'm a new parent, Tildes is the only "social media" that I regularly use, I am staunchly opposed to its use by children, and I'm dreading having to navigate it with my own kids. At the end of the day, the social pressure to use it is preposterously high for most kids, and there are very, very few tools that parents can meaningfully use to prevent it.
When something is designed specifically to attract the attention of children, and has had decades to essentially mutate culture in favor of its use, it just doesn't feel reasonable to put the burden on individual parents.
Plus, why? The cigarettes analogy feels pretty apt to me: this stuff is toxic to kid's brains and emotional regulation. They don't need it for socializing — every part of most children's day is socializing. They don't need it for news — they just don't need news. And we know it's bad. It's exactly the kind of thing that we should regulate.
I think it should be parental responsibility too, but I also think we should ban it. Reason being, if there's enough public sentiment for a ban that one passes then IMO that helps communicate a...
I think it should be parental responsibility too, but I also think we should ban it. Reason being, if there's enough public sentiment for a ban that one passes then IMO that helps communicate a cultural norm. And that will have more impact in the long term (in theory).
The problem I see is that the solution for that is age gates which puts the burden on all adults not just a child's parents, I think kids should be banned from social media but I don't agree with...
The problem I see is that the solution for that is age gates which puts the burden on all adults not just a child's parents, I think kids should be banned from social media but I don't agree with the way they are going about it.
I'd argue that we make parenting online too difficult if not impossible. The battle against social media and general digital malcontent is tilted heavily against parents. In the Before times,...
I'd argue that we make parenting online too difficult if not impossible. The battle against social media and general digital malcontent is tilted heavily against parents.
In the Before times, parents or other adults could watch children either at home or in public and provide feedback or discipline. Now paradoxically children's movements in the physical world are tightly controlled (by helicopter parents, suburbia, etc.) but they're free to run wild in the digital world, completely outside the purview of parents or community adults. They are, at best, parented by automated moderation tools.
I've discussed this on tildes before, but yeah. Ideally you'd have something included in your page request that says "i am an adult on this computer", kinda like web sudo, and thus you can access...
I've discussed this on tildes before, but yeah.
Ideally you'd have something included in your page request that says "i am an adult on this computer", kinda like web sudo, and thus you can access any site. No "enter your birthday wink wink".
If you DON'T have access to the password to trigger that flag, then you're automatically bounced from sites that require it.
You can then have a custom whitelist on the local machine for frequent requests. Yeah I don't care if they see X or Y, but it's only upon request where I use my PW and add it to the whitelist.
It's "simple", at least conceptually, and more importantly probably even enforceable. You can have fines/takedowns sent to sites that do not bother to implement the logic. Then its on the household/device owner.
The obvious issue is ok, so some kid buys their own machine or hops on their friends, but that's kinda how it always was.
I don't think you want full orwellian control of what media a child can or can't see, but I do think you need some level of control/authentication. I'm a lot less concerned about some kid seeing porn or even violence, and a hell of a lot more onboard with fining and hurting companies that target children for gambling.
This is a very elegant idea! Have you thought at all about enforcement on the client side? It seems like it may be challenging to enforce that all potential clients (browsers? Operating systems?)...
This is a very elegant idea! Have you thought at all about enforcement on the client side? It seems like it may be challenging to enforce that all potential clients (browsers? Operating systems?) implement this scheme.
Web is 100% my weakest area, so I'm sure there's some flaws, however ideally it should be insanely trivial and maybe client agnostic? I think you can force the majority of development on the...
Web is 100% my weakest area, so I'm sure there's some flaws, however ideally it should be insanely trivial and maybe client agnostic? I think you can force the majority of development on the site's side, and then just make it something like a cookie?
I feel like the hardest part is putting in enough of a boundary that it's not so trivial to spoof, but even then I'm not sure enough of the details since I mostly live in the backend.
I could be thinking about this wrong, but it seems like anything short of OS-level/secure enclave-based token here feels like it would be so trivial to forge that it's not worth the effort....
I could be thinking about this wrong, but it seems like anything short of OS-level/secure enclave-based token here feels like it would be so trivial to forge that it's not worth the effort. Someone would immediately make a browser that just always represents itself as an adult, and kids would all use that browser.
But maybe I'm making some bad assumptions. I'm genuinely interested in understanding this because it feels like a very cool idea. Taking a step back: how do you imagine the auth flow to work, when an adult wants to identify themselves as an adult to a website?
I do assume it’s going to be trivial to bypass but it’d be an inbuilt system enforced from the website side rather than some nebulous maintained white list like previous software. People will...
I do assume it’s going to be trivial to bypass but it’d be an inbuilt system enforced from the website side rather than some nebulous maintained white list like previous software. People will always get around it but I feel the main goal is shifting some of the burden.
You can’t just walk into a bar/casino/strip club. You’re checked by the location and they can be held responsible for not following local laws.
This would be aiming at the authentication being slightly better than “type 1/1/whatever in this dropdown” while not also hopefully ripping all your personal information and colonic map into some cobol mainframe.
As for work flow:
Ideally you just open the browser and if you hit a site that has this kind of protection it asks you to enter you password. Naturally you’d want some QoL features like always authenticate me after login or kill the auth once the browser closes or x timeout, but I think the main goal is to be about as unobtrusive as the average ID check at the door.
Obviously it will be MUCH easier to get around than a fake ID (which is also pretty trivial in many door check scenarios) but it strikes me as a much more sane starting point
Technically this would need to be a new web API (like DRM or passkeys) that hooks into OS-level parental controls. The difficulty would be getting browser support for such a thing - it’s sure to...
Technically this would need to be a new web API (like DRM or passkeys) that hooks into OS-level parental controls. The difficulty would be getting browser support for such a thing - it’s sure to be controversial.
Right, that's what I was imagining, as well. It took quite a lot of effort to get broad support for passkeys (something that it seems all of the major players were quite interested in, compared...
Right, that's what I was imagining, as well. It took quite a lot of effort to get broad support for passkeys (something that it seems all of the major players were quite interested in, compared with parental controls), and their implementation still has rough edges in various places. A legislated "parental control key" would presumably need to be significantly more robust, else risk locking adults out of services they actually need access to.
Why should we assume that the parent actually has the child's best interests in mind? I have heard too many stories of fellow queers whose lives would have been significantly worsened if their...
I'd argue that we make parenting online too difficult if not impossible.
Why should we assume that the parent actually has the child's best interests in mind? I have heard too many stories of fellow queers whose lives would have been significantly worsened if their parents actually knew the truth of what they were figuring out about themselves in the relative safety of online spaces.
I've always felt that this was inevitable. The anonymity of the early web was only viable due to its nicheness: any negative effects were localized to a relative minority of nerdy folks. The web...
I've always felt that this was inevitable.
The anonymity of the early web was only viable due to its nicheness: any negative effects were localized to a relative minority of nerdy folks. The web was a small part of society.
Now everyone, even toddlers, is online, web is society and society is the web. The stakes are much higher. And now we have bots that perfectly mimic humans online.
I see the problem, but I'd be willing to bet that this won't be the solution. Hackers will find ways around this, even if it means to pay people for their iris scans. Sites like reddit could ban...
I see the problem, but I'd be willing to bet that this won't be the solution. Hackers will find ways around this, even if it means to pay people for their iris scans. Sites like reddit could ban any malicious irises, but with billions of people, it will take a long time to weed out the bad ones. And if there are millions of banned users, new websites will pop up that welcome them. Governments could ban those non-compliant sites, but they could already do that right now without any new tech. China has been trying for decades.
From the article: I imagine that a mobile app that takes a selfie and a picture of your driver's license would be a more popular, given that we sometimes have to do that anyway. The question is...
From the article:
If Reddit does begin using World ID, it won’t be the only way to verify one’s humanity, according to the two people familiar with the matter. Users will have many options.
The number of online verification tools available to internet users are increasing rapidly and all offer various levels of privacy, security, and convenience, attributes that are sometimes at odds.
On Thursday, for instance, the Australian government published a report on the feasibility of its new internet age verification law. The report found there were many sufficient options, but no “single ubiquitous solution that would suit all use cases, nor did we find solutions that were guaranteed to be effective in all deployments,” the report said.
One of the main drawbacks to every solution that exists today is that a person’s information must be stored somewhere in a world in which everything is hackable. Even an encrypted string of numbers stored inside a secure enclave on an iPhone has a major flaw: Account recovery. Phones can be lost or destroyed, so the information must be accessible without needing to hack the actual phone, making that method the weakest link.
I imagine that a mobile app that takes a selfie and a picture of your driver's license would be a more popular, given that we sometimes have to do that anyway. The question is who would be a trusted third party for Reddit.
It's not just that, but what would happen to that third party over time? What if it enshittifies, has to be bought out, and someone like Palantir drops an impossible-to-refuse offer?
It's not just that, but what would happen to that third party over time?
What if it enshittifies, has to be bought out, and someone like Palantir drops an impossible-to-refuse offer?
Hopefully there would be multiple companies doing this, like domain registries and certificate authorities. (Let’s Encrypt is pretty good, but it would be bad for them to be the only choice.)
Hopefully there would be multiple companies doing this, like domain registries and certificate authorities. (Let’s Encrypt is pretty good, but it would be bad for them to be the only choice.)
Suggestions for the countries that want to push age verifications... do not simply say you want that, give also the solution they may have to implement. Otherwise, more often than not, the...
Suggestions for the countries that want to push age verifications... do not simply say you want that, give also the solution they may have to implement. Otherwise, more often than not, the solution found and pushed by social media and other sites won't be ideal and well and well attuned to your legislation.
On one hand, artificial intelligence, scammers and state actors weaponizing disinformation are killing the world wide web. Reddit is so full of slop these days that it's made me well-and-truly...
However, I wouldn't trust World ID and neither should Spez. Do what online banking apps do, require a video selfie and photo ID to verify your identity. Verification gives you a blue checkbox and lifts account limitations. This should also be the standard for online dating platforms which are basically unusable right now because they're chock-a-block with scammers and fake users. Just look at the state of Okcupid right now...
I won't pretend to know what an ideal solution is to do human verification online for social media websites and entertainment websites, but no way in hell will I let any of my biometrics end up on...
I won't pretend to know what an ideal solution is to do human verification online for social media websites and entertainment websites, but no way in hell will I let any of my biometrics end up on a website like reddit, YouTube or anything else like that. This is insane to me.
I know in the article it says that this would be one of the "many options" that users have to verify, but simply on principle to even consider something like this is a bit wild to me, something I won't be able to understand, to be honest.
Every day I am inching closer and closer to just give up on the internet and social media and only do the bare minimum interaction required for this world. Everything is becoming so exhausting...
I disconnected from FB in 2018, and then from reddit after that API nonsense. Tildes is pretty much it, and I don't even check here every day. It's nicer out here. Any really important news,...
I disconnected from FB in 2018, and then from reddit after that API nonsense. Tildes is pretty much it, and I don't even check here every day.
It's nicer out here. Any really important news, friends IRL will tell me in 1-2 days. And I have exactly as much agency to do anything about it as I did when I learned it within minutes of it breaking (None, mostly) but meanwhile I get to not worry about it.
Well I can't ignore years of my Christian college training but the orb and iris ID sounds like the mark of the beast we used to study in Revelations. For that reason it wouldn't fly with a segment...
Well I can't ignore years of my Christian college training but the orb and iris ID sounds like the mark of the beast we used to study in Revelations. For that reason it wouldn't fly with a segment of the devout Christian population.
The "mark of the beast" refers to a mark that will be given to people during the end times, identifying them with the Antichrist and his followers, and enabling them to participate in the end-times economy. Those who refuse the mark will face persecution.
Revelation 13:16-18 describes how the beast and the false prophet will compel people to receive the mark on their right hand or forehead (iris is pretty close). This mark will be a prerequisite for buying and selling in the end-times economy. Could easily see the iris scan becoming mandatory for online purchases to lock out scammers.
Interesting times ahead should it become integral to a 'safer' online economy.
I see how this can be applied here, but my very Christian grandfather said the same stuff about tech advancements for most of my life. He said the same thing about credit cards, cell phones, and...
I see how this can be applied here, but my very Christian grandfather said the same stuff about tech advancements for most of my life. He said the same thing about credit cards, cell phones, and home routers, but still had each of them. Iris scanners are a little too much for me, I just don't think very many Christians are going to push back on them on that basis if they're already used to everything else online.
I think the tipping point would be if the powers that be (which could be Amazon or Google or the government) get to the point of mandating an iris scan in order to do online business. Ive heard...
I think the tipping point would be if the powers that be (which could be Amazon or Google or the government) get to the point of mandating an iris scan in order to do online business. Ive heard the same things about credit cards and debit cards too but its always been optional and cash is still viable. But as online dialogue and scams get worse the hew and cry for SOME kind of verifiable human identity is only going to get stronger. We're still a few years out, but IMHO it would only take one catastrophe to force a quick change. I mean, look at us in Canada - the gov froze people's bank accounts for non violent protests in Ottawa. Definitely something I never thought Id ever see happen here. But it did.
Sam Altmann co founded that Blockchain company that paid crypto for your biometric data?
Also, a joke: we're pondering orbs again? What is this, 2020 twitter?
reddit is getting banned in France and a couple of other euro countries and some US states if they don't do age verification. I guess this is their solution.
Honestly I think if you're requiring people to scan their iris into a weird orb to log on to a website, you might as well be banning it.
Nobody is requiring that, though. They seem to be considering it as an option.
Woah, first I've heard of that. Any lists of affected states?
here are some, the US one at least are still in court or have yet to pass.
France
Florida
Texas
New York
Several EU countries have already banned the orb on privacy grounds, though, so I doubt this is really an effective solution.
I really want to see what happens to a country that bans social media for children. It might work out really well but we need someone to take the lead.
Edit: I got label-misuse downvoted for this comment? It's not off topic, a joke or noise.
Personally I think it should be parental responsibility, and I don't see how it would be legal in the US without having on undue burden on adults but I didn't think we would vote for trump either.
I don't think it's necessarily the right approach from a liberty perspective. I just want to see what happens. There are some kids that don't want to be involved with social media but feel obligated to partake. Maybe there are enough like that such that a ban would be really well received.
I remember seeing cigarette vending machines when I was kid. States started banning them in the '80's and '90's, but they weren't banned nationwide until 2010. I guess parental responsibility wasn't considered good enough? It can be quite hard for parents to fight cultural trends without backup from the rest of society.
I wonder how bad would it really be if signing up for certain websites had to be done in person, in a store?
Yeah I think I agree. I'm a new parent, Tildes is the only "social media" that I regularly use, I am staunchly opposed to its use by children, and I'm dreading having to navigate it with my own kids. At the end of the day, the social pressure to use it is preposterously high for most kids, and there are very, very few tools that parents can meaningfully use to prevent it.
When something is designed specifically to attract the attention of children, and has had decades to essentially mutate culture in favor of its use, it just doesn't feel reasonable to put the burden on individual parents.
Plus, why? The cigarettes analogy feels pretty apt to me: this stuff is toxic to kid's brains and emotional regulation. They don't need it for socializing — every part of most children's day is socializing. They don't need it for news — they just don't need news. And we know it's bad. It's exactly the kind of thing that we should regulate.
I think it should be parental responsibility too, but I also think we should ban it. Reason being, if there's enough public sentiment for a ban that one passes then IMO that helps communicate a cultural norm. And that will have more impact in the long term (in theory).
The problem I see is that the solution for that is age gates which puts the burden on all adults not just a child's parents, I think kids should be banned from social media but I don't agree with the way they are going about it.
I'd argue that we make parenting online too difficult if not impossible. The battle against social media and general digital malcontent is tilted heavily against parents.
In the Before times, parents or other adults could watch children either at home or in public and provide feedback or discipline. Now paradoxically children's movements in the physical world are tightly controlled (by helicopter parents, suburbia, etc.) but they're free to run wild in the digital world, completely outside the purview of parents or community adults. They are, at best, parented by automated moderation tools.
I've discussed this on tildes before, but yeah.
Ideally you'd have something included in your page request that says "i am an adult on this computer", kinda like web sudo, and thus you can access any site. No "enter your birthday wink wink".
If you DON'T have access to the password to trigger that flag, then you're automatically bounced from sites that require it.
You can then have a custom whitelist on the local machine for frequent requests. Yeah I don't care if they see X or Y, but it's only upon request where I use my PW and add it to the whitelist.
It's "simple", at least conceptually, and more importantly probably even enforceable. You can have fines/takedowns sent to sites that do not bother to implement the logic. Then its on the household/device owner.
The obvious issue is ok, so some kid buys their own machine or hops on their friends, but that's kinda how it always was.
I don't think you want full orwellian control of what media a child can or can't see, but I do think you need some level of control/authentication. I'm a lot less concerned about some kid seeing porn or even violence, and a hell of a lot more onboard with fining and hurting companies that target children for gambling.
This is a very elegant idea! Have you thought at all about enforcement on the client side? It seems like it may be challenging to enforce that all potential clients (browsers? Operating systems?) implement this scheme.
Web is 100% my weakest area, so I'm sure there's some flaws, however ideally it should be insanely trivial and maybe client agnostic? I think you can force the majority of development on the site's side, and then just make it something like a cookie?
I feel like the hardest part is putting in enough of a boundary that it's not so trivial to spoof, but even then I'm not sure enough of the details since I mostly live in the backend.
I could be thinking about this wrong, but it seems like anything short of OS-level/secure enclave-based token here feels like it would be so trivial to forge that it's not worth the effort. Someone would immediately make a browser that just always represents itself as an adult, and kids would all use that browser.
But maybe I'm making some bad assumptions. I'm genuinely interested in understanding this because it feels like a very cool idea. Taking a step back: how do you imagine the auth flow to work, when an adult wants to identify themselves as an adult to a website?
I do assume it’s going to be trivial to bypass but it’d be an inbuilt system enforced from the website side rather than some nebulous maintained white list like previous software. People will always get around it but I feel the main goal is shifting some of the burden.
You can’t just walk into a bar/casino/strip club. You’re checked by the location and they can be held responsible for not following local laws.
This would be aiming at the authentication being slightly better than “type 1/1/whatever in this dropdown” while not also hopefully ripping all your personal information and colonic map into some cobol mainframe.
As for work flow:
Ideally you just open the browser and if you hit a site that has this kind of protection it asks you to enter you password. Naturally you’d want some QoL features like always authenticate me after login or kill the auth once the browser closes or x timeout, but I think the main goal is to be about as unobtrusive as the average ID check at the door.
Obviously it will be MUCH easier to get around than a fake ID (which is also pretty trivial in many door check scenarios) but it strikes me as a much more sane starting point
"COBOL COLONIC" - there's the name of someone's next band
Technically this would need to be a new web API (like DRM or passkeys) that hooks into OS-level parental controls. The difficulty would be getting browser support for such a thing - it’s sure to be controversial.
Right, that's what I was imagining, as well. It took quite a lot of effort to get broad support for passkeys (something that it seems all of the major players were quite interested in, compared with parental controls), and their implementation still has rough edges in various places. A legislated "parental control key" would presumably need to be significantly more robust, else risk locking adults out of services they actually need access to.
Why should we assume that the parent actually has the child's best interests in mind? I have heard too many stories of fellow queers whose lives would have been significantly worsened if their parents actually knew the truth of what they were figuring out about themselves in the relative safety of online spaces.
Apparently Australia did for under 16s. I should keep an eye on that.
I've always felt that this was inevitable.
The anonymity of the early web was only viable due to its nicheness: any negative effects were localized to a relative minority of nerdy folks. The web was a small part of society.
Now everyone, even toddlers, is online, web is society and society is the web. The stakes are much higher. And now we have bots that perfectly mimic humans online.
I see the problem, but I'd be willing to bet that this won't be the solution. Hackers will find ways around this, even if it means to pay people for their iris scans. Sites like reddit could ban any malicious irises, but with billions of people, it will take a long time to weed out the bad ones. And if there are millions of banned users, new websites will pop up that welcome them. Governments could ban those non-compliant sites, but they could already do that right now without any new tech. China has been trying for decades.
Interesting times!
From the article:
I imagine that a mobile app that takes a selfie and a picture of your driver's license would be a more popular, given that we sometimes have to do that anyway. The question is who would be a trusted third party for Reddit.
It's not just that, but what would happen to that third party over time?
What if it enshittifies, has to be bought out, and someone like Palantir drops an impossible-to-refuse offer?
Hopefully there would be multiple companies doing this, like domain registries and certificate authorities. (Let’s Encrypt is pretty good, but it would be bad for them to be the only choice.)
Suggestions for the countries that want to push age verifications... do not simply say you want that, give also the solution they may have to implement. Otherwise, more often than not, the solution found and pushed by social media and other sites won't be ideal and well and well attuned to your legislation.
On one hand, artificial intelligence, scammers and state actors weaponizing disinformation are killing the world wide web. Reddit is so full of slop these days that it's made me well-and-truly believe in the dead internet theory. It's briefly mentioned in the article, but the University of Zurich actually used the r/changemyview community as guinea pigs to conduct their own research on the use of AI bots a few months back. Moderators and admins alike were furious.
However, I wouldn't trust World ID and neither should Spez. Do what online banking apps do, require a video selfie and photo ID to verify your identity. Verification gives you a blue checkbox and lifts account limitations. This should also be the standard for online dating platforms which are basically unusable right now because they're chock-a-block with scammers and fake users. Just look at the state of Okcupid right now...
And have every online account link back directly to your face?
I don't even particularly distrust my government and that makes me uncomfortable
I won't pretend to know what an ideal solution is to do human verification online for social media websites and entertainment websites, but no way in hell will I let any of my biometrics end up on a website like reddit, YouTube or anything else like that. This is insane to me.
I know in the article it says that this would be one of the "many options" that users have to verify, but simply on principle to even consider something like this is a bit wild to me, something I won't be able to understand, to be honest.
Every day I am inching closer and closer to just give up on the internet and social media and only do the bare minimum interaction required for this world. Everything is becoming so exhausting...
I disconnected from FB in 2018, and then from reddit after that API nonsense. Tildes is pretty much it, and I don't even check here every day.
It's nicer out here. Any really important news, friends IRL will tell me in 1-2 days. And I have exactly as much agency to do anything about it as I did when I learned it within minutes of it breaking (None, mostly) but meanwhile I get to not worry about it.
There might not be an ideal solution, or even a very good one.
I'm no expert, but I think verification in general is a difficult problem.
Well I can't ignore years of my Christian college training but the orb and iris ID sounds like the mark of the beast we used to study in Revelations. For that reason it wouldn't fly with a segment of the devout Christian population.
The "mark of the beast" refers to a mark that will be given to people during the end times, identifying them with the Antichrist and his followers, and enabling them to participate in the end-times economy. Those who refuse the mark will face persecution.
Revelation 13:16-18 describes how the beast and the false prophet will compel people to receive the mark on their right hand or forehead (iris is pretty close). This mark will be a prerequisite for buying and selling in the end-times economy. Could easily see the iris scan becoming mandatory for online purchases to lock out scammers.
Interesting times ahead should it become integral to a 'safer' online economy.
I see how this can be applied here, but my very Christian grandfather said the same stuff about tech advancements for most of my life. He said the same thing about credit cards, cell phones, and home routers, but still had each of them. Iris scanners are a little too much for me, I just don't think very many Christians are going to push back on them on that basis if they're already used to everything else online.
I think the tipping point would be if the powers that be (which could be Amazon or Google or the government) get to the point of mandating an iris scan in order to do online business. Ive heard the same things about credit cards and debit cards too but its always been optional and cash is still viable. But as online dialogue and scams get worse the hew and cry for SOME kind of verifiable human identity is only going to get stronger. We're still a few years out, but IMHO it would only take one catastrophe to force a quick change. I mean, look at us in Canada - the gov froze people's bank accounts for non violent protests in Ottawa. Definitely something I never thought Id ever see happen here. But it did.