Am I missing something or would the following not meet the requirements?
Add a module that does the following:
On first account login to an interactive interface, ask for an age category (<=13, 15-15,16-17,18+). So a value between 0 and 3.
Store that somewhere alongside user-level application settings.
Include a library for applications to link against.
Library contains one function, that function just returns whatever value was stored before.
I think that meets their bare minimum while also demonstrating just how dumb this is.
It wouldn’t. It would require a dedicated server to ping constantly and also an API that applications should use to ask the computer for age in background. Everyone could therefore us this data to fingerprint users…this makes everything even dumber and more prone for mass surveillance
EDIT:
Sorry for the misunderstanding. Thanmk you for correcting me
No, you’re just wrong. The law just says, there needs to be a local API, that apps can use to ask, what of 4 age brackets the user is in. That’s basically it.
There is nothing about some online server that needs to hold that data.
Nothing in the law requires some kind of online server. Only a local API, which a local library that can be linked is. And it only requires age to bebe described in four brackets, hence just storing a value 0-3. Didn’t see anything obvious as to why this wouldn’t actually meet the requirements, while being as dumb and pointless as possible.
Am I missing something or would the following not meet the requirements?
Add a module that does the following:
On first account login to an interactive interface, ask for an age category (<=13, 15-15,16-17,18+). So a value between 0 and 3. Store that somewhere alongside user-level application settings. Include a library for applications to link against. Library contains one function, that function just returns whatever value was stored before.
I think that meets their bare minimum while also demonstrating just how dumb this is.
It wouldn’t. It would require a dedicated server to ping constantly and also an API that applications should use to ask the computer for age in background. Everyone could therefore us this data to fingerprint users…this makes everything even dumber and more prone for mass surveillance
EDIT: Sorry for the misunderstanding. Thanmk you for correcting me
No, you’re just wrong. The law just says, there needs to be a local API, that apps can use to ask, what of 4 age brackets the user is in. That’s basically it. There is nothing about some online server that needs to hold that data.
Nothing in the law requires some kind of online server. Only a local API, which a local library that can be linked is. And it only requires age to bebe described in four brackets, hence just storing a value 0-3. Didn’t see anything obvious as to why this wouldn’t actually meet the requirements, while being as dumb and pointless as possible.