1. I trust it enough to use it.

As for trust in others, if I had a reason to suspect them of being underage, or an otherwise bad actor, verification of this sort would increase said trust.

Scandal is murky enough that it doesn't bother me enough to opt out of verification. And I do TRUST the contract that LL has signed with integrity and its stipulations regarding information sharing.

And as for whether you are Australian, the question has no relevance for me. Your primary importance to me is as a reporter/analyst and that's all I'm interested in.

Posted at 12:16AM on May 9th 2007 by Luciftias Neurocam

2. Don't tell me you're underage! I thought you were 55 last time we age-played :)

There's no ideal business when it comes to authentication, all known firms are inclined to malpractice and none of them provides precisely what they claim to provide. Why? Because the problem they try to solve is 100% impossible.

but...

How do I advertise SL thru my clients when the service provider shows a breach of confidentiality that is documented? This clearly is a problem LL does not want to see.

The other problem is that LL is going the obvious corporate route. Innovators are supposed to innovate.

There is a darker side to this... the way LL is handling the issue. Laetizia posted a chat blurb that reveals how we are probably on the verge of a big disconnect here. Only incidental? IPO frenzy? I do not know.

Posted at 12:50AM on May 9th 2007 by starcomber Vig

3. That whole confidentiality/privacy of information deal is just something they need to beware but... Hell, I don't care. I just don't want to deal with anymore crazy minors. Even there are some crazy adults would be bothered not to do any verification crap they required to do so. So it's a win-win plan.

Of course, I don't want share my information about myself... but what's the difference when FBI and your own governament can dig you up anyway? I'm sure everyone is already in a file somewhere, even outside of USA. It's just a information. It's not like they wanted it so bad and advertise it in a big print to everyone. It's like money, you use the money to buy something. You use your information to declare yourself as adult or not?

I almost can feel the thoughts going on with the society freaking out that everyone knows you're a adult. Well...duh, you should be?

Funny how people didn't really take a pressing matter about how people are being asked for their IDs to drink beer. While knowing there are some idiot minors drinking them. Except, now everyone is trying not to drink. Does it means people doesn't want to help LL with illegal Ageplay to go on?

No no.... think about it. ;) It seem mature enough to do.

Posted at 2:02AM on May 9th 2007 by Nacon

4. ageplay is illegal? I thought this was about unsupervised minors having access to stuff their parents don't want o talk with them.....

Posted at 2:34AM on May 9th 2007 by TigroSpottystripes Katsu

5. Another Aussie? Cool! Do you have any idea what form of ID Integrity Services might want from us? A blood sample? Is Australia in IS's famous list of 157 countries? So many mysteries so few clues. Still not buying or spending L$ until the future is clarified.

Posted at 3:44AM on May 9th 2007 by Natascha Seiling

6. No no... ageplay is where adult play as a kid... which may lead to sex anyway.... thus illegal kiddie porn.

Having a minor in ageplay is even worst, doubles up the hard times behind the bars. That's what worries LL so much. They don't want to be dragged into court for that kind of crap. ..would you want to? O_o

Posted at 4:31AM on May 9th 2007 by Nacon

7. Mostly this issue seems to be about whatever people want it to be about. Politics, law, ageplay, open registration, furries, you name it.

Posted at 4:46AM on May 9th 2007 by Tateru Nino

8.
Trust? Trust? Well ...

I trust my credit card company to have enough experience to sensibly handle stuff over the internet because they have years of experience sufficient reason to do, as well as I trust large scale credit card processors to do the same.

Why I mention this? Because it's a point of reference which many might share or relate to.

Do I trust LL? A bit like Inigo said on the SL-Herald, I trust them to come up with half cooked ideas that seem like being not really thought through and which are then and implemented and communicated in a pathetical way.

Regarding residents, I'm not interested in their real identity anyway, I'm mostly interacting through them through the roles they choose, so (just as an example) cross-genders and that stuff don't bother me. That is, this whole verification thing has zero impact on me in the resident interactions, it's just clear that LL want to cover their ass.

What I would prefer, and that relates to their crappy corportate public communication, that they would not try to sell me something as a benefit to the user (for which most did not ask) when it's clear that they have a different motivation, and just instead say that in a complex legal world it's a requirement to enforce their TOS, that things have changed, etc. and this why and that's about it.

That is, trying to sell me trust through an obvious lie, is going to backfire for them and already does.

Posted at 8:04AM on May 9th 2007 by Nicholaz Beresford

9. "Mostly this issue seems to be about whatever people want it to be about"
Too right. I don't see it as an issue at all. If I were paranoid I'd be more worried about giving them my credit card than verifying my age. And, oops, I've already done that.
I see it as a sign that the platform is maturing. Fly-by-night pornographic web sights don't bother with age verification because they aren't big enough to sue and can just shut down and start up again. Second Life has grown big enough to be a target worth sueing in this litigatious society. So requiring age verification is a sign of due dilligence.
And, to be honest, I think the alarmists are missing the boat about what's going to have the biggest effect on the Second Life experience: the charging model for mature access. But that's a longer comment and probably more relevent for an upcomming post. :-)
JC

Posted at 8:11AM on May 9th 2007 by Jaymin Carthage

10. I trust my own instincts in determining whether someone is an adult or not more than I trust LL's proposal. I feel reasonably confident in my own ability to determine someone's level of maturity through conversation. I have no confidence in a scheme that I can with little effort think of ways to circumvent.

That said, I can see that proprietors of places that desire or need to restrict access by age likely do not have the resources to determine "adultness", and would prefer the legal shield of having it predetermined for them, so something like this may be attractive, even if obviously defective.

As to determining whether an avatar is really from the RL location claimed, that's trickier, but matters much less to me, except as a matter of personal interest. On the other hand, I would more likely trust third party assertion of location than of age (or other details). I can see that it can make a large difference in terms of certain legal issues, such as gambling laws, and again being able to pass responsibility to a third party could be attractive.

The real problem is that any company can only verify that the credentials presented to them are legitimate. They cannot prove that the person presenting them is legitimate in any meaningful way.

Posted at 2:57PM on May 9th 2007 by Tho Millgrove

11. My trust level is about the same as credit card verification. If a child can steal or get a CC to be verified, then verification by any other means involving any other cards, such as SS, drivers license, etc. is equal. Unsupervised "bad" children will defeat this verification system if they want to.

Supervised Internet use -- parents closely monitoring their children's Internet use -- is more effective than an age verification system, and it places the burden where it should be, on the parents.

Parents should pay the price of a window when a child willfully breaks it with a rock; why shouldn't parents have to monitor their child's use of the Internet to prevent the rest of us from having to pay for verification systems that won't work?

Posted at 8:30PM on May 18th 2007 by gando