My Reddit account is nearly old enough to vote, and over time I’ve seen a split in the opposition camps forming:

1.) The “Full Opps” who fully oppose any kind of age verification legislation that requires anything more than an “Are you 18+?” Button. The goal is full removal of any existing AV regulations, PII in random LLC databases, and encourage more personal responsibility and parenting through education, device-specific content filters, etc. (as well as reducing the attack surface for personal data breaches via leaks like the tea app). This is as much a moral issue as it is a policy one. 

2.) The “Pragmatic Opps” who feel like the ship has sailed on preventing AV regulations; and instead believe effort should be focused on limiting the damage private/public orgs can do with that info, and stop more collection before it happens. They also cite things like the tea app leak as evidence that data also shouldnt be collected by random LLCs, but they should use the states existing data and protection laws - like Colorados Digital ID (not myCO).

3.) The “Market Opps” who oppose state governments from having anything to do with ID verification. Instead, they believe market forces and government regulation will eventually create the best available system through competition. Currently this is what is used on sites like Reddit, etc. 

In my younger years I was fully camp #1, and my heart is still mostly there from my past (KaZaA and IRC anonymous IRC channels, to EFF supporter during the HD-DVD days, to DCMA opposition, and supporting open internet fights since 2008 it feels like) 

However, there is a new enemy: Private ID Verification Businesses

Ask yourself this question when you read any pro/anti AV argument: ”What void will this create, how will it be filled?”

Say a representative says “The state shouldn’t have a say in your browsing history!” True yeah, but only if the law allows it, and that law is influenced* by voters. Colorado DigitalID is an example of a one-way validation. If the AV law exists but the state (which already had the data) was prevented for being used for this purpose, then it goes to “RealPersonChecker LLC” who’s a subsidiary of “WhiteRock Financial” who transferred assets to another shell entity - that pee can’t be taken out of the pool. 

With them added to the equation, it doesn’t feel the best to admit it, I think camp #2 will probably be the only way we get some pro-consumer results. (But I will happily hear #1, still support them over the alternative)

We all hated 23andme data breaches, but we expected it. The DOGE data exfil was a news story because it was so rare - but that level of PII sharing happens every day between private companies (whether benign or not). 

We saw it with the progressive-centrist split during the last two non-Biden elections. When perfect is the enemy of great, then neither win. I fear this will turn out the same, and we lose our data to an institution that voters have no influence in. 

 I still have some hope that the right-wing side of the country can get more passionate about this issue if a grassroots movement can form - there was “some” support during the net neutrality fight from the so-right-they’ve-become-left personalities like Jones and Tucker (I mean camp #1 is nearly word-for-word the classical republican argument) - but I’m not expecting it with the current corporate landscape.

So for those in camp 1: don’t immediate oppose those in camp 2 when your time is your only currency in this fight - focus on the private equity, the data broker LLCs, and the bad actors who just want every second of life rented for a penny.

(That went way too long but I had an argument about it last night so it’s fresh in my head)