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
This read more like "we thought pc was a dead relic of the past" sadly

>>qiine+yc
I think it's more that smartphones have built in security measures that prevent hacking. It already works for bank apps, so why not use it for government stuff too?

It sucks, yes, but that's probably how these people think.

>>ameliu+4g
but if age verification is used for what it claims it is such hacking protections are not only unnecessary but fundamentally harmful (i.e. if a child hacks their PC it's fine if they circumvent age verification, the main responsibility still lies with parents and as such tools like parent controls are much more relevant)

the main reason is that this is not a reference implementations or "this is the app everyone must use" case but a "to see what is technical possible/practical" "research/POV" project

this also makes the "EU age verification app" title quite misleading