zlacker

>>sschue+(OP)
This is a great example of how this whole requirement hasn't been properly thought out.

> Desktop support is not currently within the project's scope.

What I would like to take from this is that, by their own definition, desktop apps are out of scope for Age Verification. So does that mean we will see a return of the 'desktop applications' instead of everything being a web service ?

One can dream perhaps. Until then adults who are willing to 'do what they're told' will be the ones who are inconvenienced by this constantly.

Edit: Also this will completely disable any new phone OS' being developed. Why would anyone bother when you can't verify your wallet to do anything online.

>>bileka+vb
> oes that mean we will see a return of the 'desktop applications'...?

No. It's still required by law, which means that your desktop application will require some interaction with your smartphone.

>>Luker8+xc
Further forcing everybody to have their phone on person at all times

>>cenamu+hd
I've been saying this for years: eventually not having your phone on you and powered up at all times will not be a crime, but it will be grounds for questioning and search.

One day, there will be a knock on your door.

"Good morning, this is the police. Is there something wrong with your phone? Is your phone broken? Can we provide you with a charge?"

"No, I must have turned it off accidentally."

"Can we assist you with an upgrade? The newer models don't have power buttons."