EU Online Age Verification (Age assurance) been enforced from 21st July 2025

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123684497#Comment_123684497

It would be just bullshit on your part to suggest that EU citizens had no impact on the election of Donald Trump, given that Cambridge Analytica was a UK company, led by UK people, at a time when the UK was part of the EU.

You've not shown any connection between the horrendous violent attack against this woman and pornography. You've mentioned there were some sexual threats as part of the attack. But you've not shown any connection between these sexual threats and pornography. There was no such suggestion in any of the Court reports on this case. You've just made up a theoretical connection, out of your own imagination. And you've ignored any possible connection to, for example, the extensive glorification of gang violence in TV and movies. It's pure supposition on your part, with no basis in evidence.

If you want to make a general argument about a connection between violence and pornography, then make that argument. But you'll also need to look at other causes of violence - look at violence in TV and movies, look at growing financial inequalities, look at the frequent glorification of gang violence in the tabloid media, look at the housing crisis, look at the climate crisis.

There are lots of causes of violence, and this narrow targeting of pornography is the same nonsense that led to book bannings like Catcher in the Rye, Brave New World, Borstal Boy and The Country Girls.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123685622#Comment_123685622

It would be just bullshit on your part to suggest that EU citizens had no impact on the election of Donald Trump, given that Cambridge Analytica was a UK company, led by UK people, at a time when the UK was part of the EU.

Well that’s not the reason I didn’t suggest it, but at least I can see where you’re coming from now in suggesting that one company represents the will of 450 million EU citizens.

If you want to make a general argument about a connection between violence and pornography, then make that argument.

I already made the argument, with examples, one of which you’ve chosen as a hill to die on instead of acknowledging the broader point being made.

There are lots of causes of violence, and this narrow targeting of pornography is the same nonsense that led to book bannings like Catcher in the Rye, Brave New World, Borstal Boy and The Country Girls.

You keep insisting that there’s a narrow targeting of pornography in spite of all evidence to the contrary, when the legislation is an attempt to tackle all forms of violence, hatred, harassment and exploitation which children are exposed to online, and there exists already legislation to tackle the causes of violence in other forms. So long as they leave Shakespeare untouched, I think most people will manage.

(Instead of bedtime stories, my son and I would act out Shakespeare’s plays when he was a child, and later when he went to a performance of Macbeth in Dolphin’s Barn as part of a school trip, he was pretty underwhelmed. I guess you can’t please everyone!)

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123685844#Comment_123685844

It's not an example though. There have been specific examples of violent attacks where viewing of pornography was cited as an actual factor in Court, such as the Ana Kriégel murder. The case you cited is NOT an example of this. There were no mentions of pornography in Court proceedings. The attackers are ALL adults, and so would not be impacted by any measures under the new legislation. Some of them are old enough to have missed the online availability of pornography when they were under 18. You've just taken a violent attack, and attributed this attack as linked to pornography with zero evidence to support your claim.

There IS narrow targeting of pornography, though the narrow targeting of online platforms and narrow targeting of under 18s. There's no attempt to address the strong and persistent availability of violence in traditional media. There's no attemp to address the glorification of gang violence in tabloid media. There's no attempt to address the deep disconnects of people left in awful positions due to our housing crisis.
Nah, let's stop the kids from jerking off and everything will be fine. John Charles McQuaid would be proud that his twisted legacy continues to this day.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123685971#Comment_123685971

Were McQuaid alive today, I think the only way you would have impressed him is by your use of visual rhetoric, not a visual I needed tbh 😂

It’s true though that this particular piece of legislation only addresses the exposure of children to harmful content online, but it would be misleading to suggest that there isn’t other legislation which exists which targets the other forms of harmful influences which children are exposed to, there has been for some time, and this new legislation is simply catching up with regulating content in the online space, which has for far too long been overlooked.

There is nothing in any existing legislation I’m aware of either nationally or internationally which prohibits children from interfering with themselves. If you’re aware of it, by all means, I’d be interested to see it. The closest I can think of is laws relating to the distribution of such material, where children either sending or receiving can become the subject of a criminal prosecution should they choose to engage in that sort of behaviour.

corkie

One of the annoyances of it is that the EU don't have the age assurance app ready before they start enforcing the rules.

https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/the-uks-new-age-verification-is-a-privacy-nightmare-but-it-doesnt-need-to-be/

Long article but highlights things in the pipeline like: -

• Zero Knowledge Proofs (ZKP). ~ EU Digital Wallet should have it!
• Privado ID is one of a companies working with the European Commission on rolling out age verification systems built around ZKPs. Another is Google, which has already taken steps to introduce ZKP into Google Wallet, in partnership with Sparkasse in Germany. But it's a widespread effort on how to go about interoperability, including all manner of businesses, governments, and trade associations.

It is a bit of the wild west at present with multiple providers and some privacy abusing ones. And unfortunately it is up to the platform/website that selects the provider. But heard Bluesky maybe also provide a method to use 'Stripe'

https://www.biometricupdate.com/202507/biometric-age-verification-tool-for-web-browsers-released-by-ocr-studio

^ Interesting development

Cost Involved with following the rules (uk as an example)

Some small sites/forums in the uk have decided to shutdown, it is not just cost of the age gate providers, but to provide the constant moderation of the same and having to file regular reports how they are complying with the rules and the risks of been in breach and fined anyway.

Examples:-

• The Green Living Forum ~ archive post
• reject convenience

My query is wondering what sort of audience/traffic does boards get from the UK, and if much are you considering blocking traffic from the UK? @Boards.ie: Odhran

Some online discussions!

I was told Ireland wasn't in the EU! Different person than below.

Having a discussion with someone on socials who admitted she wasn't aware of DSA rules until yesterday, and started to go on about petitions (not change.org ones but to actual EU process) ~ Example search most I found where for stronger rules.

I linked to the UK Petition that was getting traction, to show how ineffective they are, but claimed I was side tracking the conversation and then chosen to block. I have a theory when someone does that in a conversation they have lost it or more interest in their own opinions than others.

Podge_irl

The EU frequently brings in, or attempts to bring in, regulations when it doesn't have the compliance processes ready. It generally means the regulations get delayed until they are actually ready though (sometimes at the last minute).

corkie

@Podge_irl Aware of EU history of them doing that but in this case their enforcing the rules already.

As my 'Xitter' account is a Protected Legacy account that is already age verified, I set up another test account to checkout the verification process last night. Also to be able to reply/tag accounts so they don't need to be following me.

Accounts posting from EU Countries that rules aren't in effect/law in their country, I got 'Grok' to issue the below statement, so if anyone search 'Age Verification EU' they might see this: -

EU's Digital Services Act (DSA) mandates age verification for Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) like X, enforced via Ireland's Online Safety Code starting July 21, 2025, due to our EU HQ in Dublin. This applies EU-wide, superseding conflicting national rules, and is separate from the UK's Online Safety Act. X is implementing compliant measures.

Note: Not an active user of the platform recently, but wanted to see what was happening with it! No way yet to verify by ID yet with the platform (except maybe premium members, but unclear if that works too, so don't waste money signing up), they say it is in the works along with bug fixes.

Platforms implementation of the rules, is what is causing censorship, not the rules themselves!

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj3l0e4vr0ko

But BBC Verify found a range of public interest content, including parliamentary debates on grooming gangs, has been restricted on X and Reddit for those who have not completed age verification checks.

Experts warn companies are risking stifling legitimate public debate by over applying the law.

• But Prof Livingstone noted that it was "possible that the companies are over-blocking to undermine the Act".

Of course 'Musk' is pulling out his old rhetoric about free speech again: -

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/aug/01/uk-online-safety-act-free-speech-x-elon-musk

US Politicians where in Dublin this week:-

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2025/08/01/frustration-about-regulation-could-lead-tech-companies-to-pull-back-from-europe-us-warns/

Mr Byrne said: “I welcome and value the perspectives of our American friends from both sides of the aisle. The Government supports EU digital regulation which is designed to protect consumers and the public. I welcome the opportunity to exchange views on this matter with the visiting delegation.”

I thought the regulation rules where going to be used as bargaining chips in the Tariffs talks? But didn't hear anymore about it.

There hasn't been much news otherwise over the last two days, and RTE Clarity have yet to? (if at all to feature it).

• YouTube rolling out AI-powered age verification tech

With using different platforms and devices, I forgot how I bookmarked the gaza link above to reuse later, I used a private WhatsApp group to store it. Handy for cross device and platforms links.

Boards.ie: Odhran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123687517#Comment_123687517

About 34k active users per month so will need something - I think Vanilla will handle this but thanks for flagging.

circadian

Well, digging into the UK act it turns out that Carnegie, a Think Tank, had a large part to play in its formation. The Carnegie Endowment organisation in the US (related to the UK body) has a long list of private firms (Google, Facebook and Citadel Securities stand out) who would, without a doubt, be able to make a fortune off a bill that potentially reduces security of encryption and hands personal data to unknown third parties.

https://carnegieendowment.org/corporate-circle

From what I can see, this bill is being shaped by non-elected bodies and there is little to no transparency or parliamentary review.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123698553#Comment_123698553

From what I can see, this bill is being shaped by non-elected bodies and there is little to no transparency or parliamentary review.

Oh come on, that’s the stuff of conspiracy theorists wet dreams. I’ve seen the conspiracy theories doing the rounds on YouTube of a relationship between Carnegie and Ofcom (I can’t link to them now as I blocked them so I wouldn’t be recommended any more similar content by the algorithm), and they are reliant on people’s ignorance, and a hell of a convincing narrative if one is conspiratorially inclined.

The reality of course isn’t nearly so sexy, with the Online Safety Act in the UK having been subject to numerous parliamentary debates, scrutiny, reviews and adjustments over the period of it’s inception right up to when it was enacted in 2023.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Safety_Act_2023

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/27/chief-online-harms-regulator-steps-blow-labour/

And numerous child welfare organisations supported the bill when it was being drafted, while Carnegie UK took a step back once the bill became law -

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/consultations/category-1-10-weeks/call-for-evidence-second-phase-of-online-safety-regulation/responses/carnegie-uk?v=202772&__cf_chl_tk=hcXeZ6T3u5fV6Cc2L3Cr9mhJe.1dLNo_fdyZAP1JePw-1754413300-1.0.1.1-jjUQ9sqaqJ2x52Rie8ElPXpPmxHMscYqjc5mCIuTxv4

Following the passage of the Act in 2023, Carnegie UK decided it was the right point to stop our policy work on online safety, with a view that other organisations were better placed to continue this work into future phases. However, the Online Safety Network, led by our former associate Maeve Walsh continue to play a crucial role in this policy space. 

https://carnegieuk.org/programmes/online-harms/

Carnegie UK operates independently from its original benefactor, and certainly operates independently from any association with US-based foundations -

https://carnegieuk.org/who-we-are/history-and-investment/

corkie

The rules of Article 28(1) here:-

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng#:~:text=Article%C2%A035,indicate%20such%20information

And what they actually mean for the platforms and sites:-

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/the-long-awaited-eu-guidelines-on-1260247/

There hasn't been much in the news recently on it! But a lot of people on 'Xitter' not believing the platform is under EU rules and not just UK.

Short update for this post.

Jack Daw

HAs this come into being today, ive seen content blocked on some posts on twitter today

corkie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123701861#Comment_123701861

It is being in effect for the last 5 days or more going by my reddit posts on it.

Legacy 'Xitter' accounts are already verified.

"Account creation date: If an account was created in 2012 or earlier."

And search for, scratch that here is the link for other methods for already verified.

corkie

'Xitter' Finally rolled out an extremely buggy way for non premium users to verify their age yesterday.

Yet to actually see that option on my test account.

But I tried the other method of scanning a qr code on sensitive content posts, for it to unlock adult content on mobile for the account(without needing selfie or ID). But desktop still show the sensitive content warning. Even 'Xitter' implementation is not robust enough, visit a profile which has some sensitive content and click the media tab to see all the adult content uncensored for that account.

I don't think I shared the below links on the thread yet?

https://better-internet-for-kids.europa.eu/en/news/irelands-online-safety-code-guide-parents

https://www.netsweeper.com/government/global-impact-of-eu-age-verification-law-july-25-2025

The EU DSA doesn't actually mandate Age Assurance but Ireland's code does for VSPS/VLOPs with HQ here.

Which is why a lot of EU users are still questioning why the rules are in effect for them. I pointed out tonight, that it is the companies been regulated and not the end users (side effect of it).

I shared the below on both my accounts, but as my main is a protected account and my test account very limited, don't think many would have seen it.

Someone else might like to share it as well to get the word out? Only a suggestion!

Was wondering if I should have shared the above on the 'X Thread' instead of this thread?

Enduro

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/aug/09/uk-online-safety-act-internet-censorship-world-following-suit

Good article here. As I have pointed out on this thread, the only way to successfully implement what is being attempted here is to construct a surveillance state. This article is pointing out that these laws are sending us in exactly this direction. It's weird that so many "progressives" are so enthusiastic about this. These laws in reality are going are repressive, not progressive. Not surprising to see that the MAGA crowd in the US see the opportunity here to restrict LGBT content to"protect" kids from "harmful" content. All enabled by these attempts to control internet viewing.

When the crackdown on VPNs begins, you'll know for sure that we're heading for government controlled surveillance states.

corkie

"opinions: - implying that everyone has one and they are not always pleasant."

"Opinions are the symphonies of democracy."

Aus: Social Media "Age Verification" : You be the judge, is the Government lying ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYSqftdRQ2I

^^ Craig Kelly ~ Channell

1st Amendment doesn't apply to Online Age Verification in the US anymore. ~ Going by recent court hearings!

I welcome conflicting opinions on this thread to further the discussion. A lot of scaremongering is been sprouted in the media. The regulations UK/EU are quite clear on what they want to achieve, it is platforms interpretation of rules is what is causing confusion, there practice of overzealous use of them is what is wrong, not the rules themselves.

It is a pity that he didn't show the full clip of that from Nov '24?

https://twitter.com/QBCCIntegrity/status/1855798266748654048

The stupidity of legislature?

Age assurance is a broader concept that includes both age verification and age estimation. Instead of confirming an exact age, it focuses on assessing whether a user falls within a particular age range or meets the minimum required age for accessing certain content or services. ~ Nitpicking by the video creator above focusing on age checks!

I opened this thread with a link to thread, where I was worried last year where these rules might lead. EU Digital Wallets (ZKP ~ built in) are in the pipeline. And not the for this thread but lookout for European Democracy Shield (McGrath to bring about).

So do you think that it would be good for the EU to ban people from using VPNs, and to ban people from using any satellite internet services? How would they enforce this? Do you think that the EU should make it an offence to use a VPN? Do you think the EU should have the legal right to ascertain whether a citizen is using a VPN or not?

When the crackdown on VPNs begins, !!??

So you believe that could happen now?

corkie

The proprietor of the 'TOWN DUMP' has spoken!

It is not the EU/UK that is censoring, but overzealous interpretation of the rules that the platforms themselves are censoring. If you think 'Musk' has any of the public interests in mind, just look at his choice of using the below for premium users verification process:-

X's decision to partner with AU10TIX - an Israeli firm which was found compromised once in 2024.

If you think EU/UK regulations are the bad guys in this scenario think again EU/UK GDPR rules are actually protecting non premium users need to be verified with that provider, instead xAI (/Grok) is used.

Scope: The AU10TIX partnership primarily covers identity verification for paid tiers (X Premium, ad revenue participants) and is essential as X moves toward more regulated and financial services.

Not in EU/UK: ID verification using AU10TIX is not available in the EU, EEA, or UK due to data protection laws.

Privacy Criticism: Some digital rights groups and users have raised privacy concerns, partly because of AU10TIX’s background (founded by former Israeli security officials) and the transfer of biometric data to a third party. X and AU10TIX have not publicly addressed these privacy criticisms.

Found out last night, because an 18 year old user (reddit post) was regretting providing ID to 'X', and I want to check if their was any third party provider involved. I replied to him/her with instructions and links to the right process for the EU/UK for the "right to be forgotten" or "erasure" under GDPR rules. There is no dedicated link on 'X' for it.

People on here probably know I am not a big fan of using 'Xitter', Only using it at the moment because that is where the latest effects of the regulations are playing out. Musk had year at the least to prepare for the need to have Age Verification rolled out, and there only now making a balls of the process. Just search it for 'Age verification' and also put 'UK/EU' after it as well, loads of complaints.

Musk champion of FREE SPEECH when it suits himself, you think he would welcome the rules in his fight over the 'Woke Mind Virus'!? ~ Yes I am a 'FREE SPEECH' advocate myself.

If you think my choice of using 'Human Verified' app/process was bad? If you like to be profiled and paid to be advertised to? Check out this scam service been posted on 'X': - billions.network/privacy-policy

Enduro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123710415#Comment_123710415

So you believe that could happen now?

I never expressed an opinion either way on whether it could happen. But my opinion would be that of course it "could". It wouldn't be the first time that an organisation headed in the direction of constructing a surveillance state. "Is it likely" would be a much better question. Well, this collection of godawful legislation is certainly a starting point, and if they want to make the legislation effective enough to do what they claim they want it to achieve, then they will have to. There are plenty of people in positions of power who would be very happy to utilise the opportunity to do so.

In an Irish context, I really don't think any of the current governing parties have any intention of deliberately constructing a surveillance state in its own right. But it's perfectly possible they could end up constructing the machinery of such a state as a side effect. The naivety of what is being attempted unfortunately illustrates that this could happen.

Enduro

It is not the EU/UK that is censoring, but overzealous interpretation of the rules that the platforms themselves are censoring.

That's largely irrelevant to the actuality of what is happening. The surveillance machine is being constructed as a result of the naieve rules, and cheered on by clueless "progressives". Best case scenario is that it is a result of over-zealous interpretation of the new laws, as you interpret it. It is still happening nonetheless, and that is still not good at all. And of course it is opening a huge opportunity for less naive, but more dangerously motivated people in positions of power to use the new tools and data for much more sinister purposes.

corkie

Not be critical but you linked to an opinion piece article so my reply quotes where in reference to that article and thanks for sharing it. I read the article earlier myself earlier in the day, but as it was the usual attack of the process, didn't see the need myself to link it. Not everything I come across do I instantly share on here. It maybe be a piece by a accredited journalist!

• Taylor Lorenz is a technology journalist who writes the newsletter User Mag and is the author of the bestselling book Extremely Online: The Untold Story of Fame, Influence, and Power on the Internet.

Still doesn't make her opinion piece factual or correct in her analysis of the process, but my understanding (I Could be wrong) is she hasn't taken time to actually read the legastion in the UK/EU, where her points are invalid.

with the de facto removal of vast swaths of content from the web. Tech companies find it easier and cheaper to simply remove mass amounts of information than have something slip through and be deemed non-compliant.

This as I said is the companies fault and not the legalisation.

Not from the above but:

Irish law does require platforms to balance safety with fundamental rights (like freedom of expression), and there may be grounds for challenge (e.g., judicial review, or complaints to the regulator or courts) if measures are disproportionate, but the enforcement regime targets under-compliance. ~ Musk challenged and lost IT

UK:-

Nevertheless, the law also requires platforms to protect freedom of expression and Ofcom has a supervisory duty to ensure platforms’ measures are “proportionate” and do not result in unjustified censorship. If platforms are found to be suppressing too much lawful speech, affected parties can challenge platforms’ policies in court or complain to Ofcom, but there is no routine fining power specifically for excessive censorship.

While both Irish and UK regulators can impose substantial fines for failing to protect users from harmful content, current enforcement frameworks do not specifically penalize companies for being “overzealous” in content moderation. Excessive censorship can be challenged, and platforms may be required to change their practices, but fines are not typically issued for over-implementation unless it constitutes a breach of fundamental rights that persists after regulatory warnings or court intervention.

But as a side effect the most common complaint I have come across is about what musk calls 'The woke mind virus' and gender issues been censored to protect children from reading about trans or gender dysphoria content?

If you want to complain about over moderation:- https://www.cnam.ie/industry-and-professionals/complaints/online/

corkie

I found out today that 'Reddit' is no longer pre verify legacy accounts. Came across a post which said years old account was now been age gated! My previous test worked okay. When connect to London VPN server today, I was also age gated and a request for verification popped up. Didn't go through with the process because I didn't want to give Persona a selfie. 12 Year old account myself, did I create it when I was under 7?

I hoping when it gets rolled out for the EU, that EU Verification Providers are available.

'Xitter' and 'Bluesky' are also making the same mistake of age gating on the client side instead of the server. So there implementation can be bypassed by browser extensions, deeming them not robust enough for EU/UK guidelines. Applies to website, apps are by their nature would meet the guidelines. I have tested the methods to bypass.

I have raised caution about VPNs before in thread:-

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/free-vpn-risks-online-safety-act-163438154.html

Older news that I neglect to share last week (deal is done now but was wondering about them): -

US trade deal doesn’t touch EU tech laws, Brussels vows (again)

"Digital to legislation is part of European Regulatory Competition Policy. It’s in the interest of everyone, also of American companies," he went on, before further emphasising "there is no change in the application of rules just because of trade policy issues."

YouTube to begin testing a new AI-powered age verification system in the U.S.

^^ From wednesday ~ Hoping they honour legacy google accounts here.

Reports that US TikTok users are also been age gated!

https://www.hypefresh.com/tiktok-starts-age-checks-in-the-us-to-block-underage-accounts/

https://www.dexerto.com/tiktok/exclusive-tiktok-sources-debunk-rumors-of-ai-age-verification-coming-to-us-3237145/

YouTube's ID Verification Has BEGUN!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGnR3C8bVLA

Well aware of youtube's history with community guidelines and bare instructions to content creators especially the vaping community. Losing hope they will honour my legacy google account and force verification on EU users anyway.

Hoping this post has enough comments by me and doesn't get considered a link dump. I prefer to create one post rather than having to create multiple different posts with different links.

Enduro

https://www.irishtimes.com/media/2025/08/12/online-pornography-age-verification-is-en-route-but-the-devils-in-the-detail/

Another opinion piece, this time in the Irish times. It looks like it tries to be balanced, and points out quite a few issues, many of which are very political.

A few key lines, which have been brought up on this thread :

Critics argue these mandated checks threaten anonymity, create honeypots of sensitive data and inevitably overshoot, sweeping in sexual health resources, LGBTQ+ information or art that crude filters misclassify. They also fear a creeping extension of age limits to other types of content deemed inappropriate for minors.

Proponents say these risks can be managed. The argument has acquired a partisan edge, with the Labour government and the opposition Reform UK hurling insults at each other. The political mood music will colour both enforcement and whether the British model is exported or quietly abandoned.

And from a later section :

If all this is going to work, a few principles will need to hold. Data should be minimised and retained for as close to zero time as possible. Verification services should be independent of the content platforms they serve. Adults should have a choice among privacy-preserving methods, and teenagers should not be pushed into darker corners of the internet by clumsy design.

That last line is already a failure, since the regulations by their nature will push underage users away from age gated platform towards the millions of non age-gated sites.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123717819#Comment_123717819

I think what he means with that last line is that a sites clumsy design might simply leave users with nowhere to navigate if they fail whatever verification method is in place, as opposed to more frequently used method of directing users to more safe sites such as disney.com, just as an example. Here’s a bit of a throwback though that demonstrates the idea -

https://www.clickorlando.com/features/2024/03/07/paranoiacom-this-creepy-link-sends-you-straight-to-disneys-website-but-why/

corkie

Good article @Enduro but where does it say that it is an opinion article, under 'Media'?
^ Tagged because another post in the time it took me to type this.

Like your choice of quoting the last quote!

• Verification services should be independent of the content platforms they serve. Adults should have a choice among privacy-preserving methods

At present the platforms/website are only providing one and it is their choice of whom? And in case of twitter it is in house if in the UK/EU.

Ireland is getting the blame for forcing it on 'Xitter' and people are starting to realise our regulators part in it.

It will be just sending minors to dark web where there is more risky adult content which can not be regulated as easily, so I agree with you on that. Also adults may utilise free VPN's which as mentioned can be more privacy invasive than the age gate providers they are trying to avoid.

Ireland also jumped the gun, by enforcing the legislation before the EU Age gate Providers (/app) was available.

corkie

Just had a look at google news and the below was in my feed!

https://www.independent.co.uk/extras/indybest/gadgets-tech/best-free-vpn-b2798755.html

He also list his choice of paid versions.

I am lucky, I paid for a lifetime subscription to Windscribe a good few years ago, so I can recommend that as well, even though the free version is limited in the amount of servers you have a choice of.

My history of getting it documented in this thread!

https://www.xda-developers.com/dns-blocking-is-double-edged-sword/

• It's also used by your ISPs and governments worldwide to censor the parts of the open internet that they find objectionable. And that's a problem, because in the wrong hands, this powerful cybersecurity tool turns into another way to control what you can see online.
• Many governments have tried, or are actively blocking, DNS services like Cloudflare or any other open DNS resolver that can bypass DNS hijacks aimed at censorship.
• The open nature of the internet is at stake when content can be blocked in large blocks like this, and that benefits nobody but those looking to consolidate power.

If your a paid subscriber on here, I created an extension that hides the notice on top of the forums and puts an overlay on the site to reduce the amount of page bouncing you see. See this post on the method to get it.

Enduro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123717891#Comment_123717891

It could mean any number of things (It's not very clear what exactly he means), but one thing is for sure is that this will have the effect of driving underage users away from effectively age-gated sites to sites which are not age-gated (many of which will be, by their nature, darker corners of the internet). These laws are worse than useless, they are actually counter-productive (Not the first time that has happened)

Edit to add:

Pornhub actually pointed out the obvious today :

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/aug/13/porn-site-traffic-falls-online-safety-act-age-checks

A spokesperson for Pornhub said: “As we’ve seen in many jurisdictions around the world, there is often a drop in traffic for compliant sites and an increase in traffic for non-compliant sites.”

Enduro

And speaking of crap laws, another opinion piece in the Irish Times pointing out the stupidity of another potential attempt to kybosh the internet through moronic (if well intentioned) laws:

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/2025/08/13/letting-gardai-access-our-whatsapps-and-chats-to-investigate-crime-could-backfire/

One releveant paragraph in there that I'm going to pick out:

Even Europol and the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity agree. They previously conceded that mandatory backdoors or weakening encryption would “increase the attack surface for malicious abuse, which, consequently, would have much wider implications for society”. They also questioned the efficacy of such measures: “Moreover, criminals can easily circumvent such weakened mechanisms and make use of the existing knowledge on cryptography to develop (or buy) their own solutions without backdoors”.

Building a secure cryptographic system for online communications is a lot harder than bypassing an age-gate. But even at that PKE was independently invented twice, for example. So they are of course correct. Self-building VPNs to bypass age-gating would be trivial in comparison

And if you're going to be naive enough to argue that kids won't have that kind of knowledge or skills, well, have a look at what the Collison kids started, for a local example.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123720467#Comment_123720467

one thing is for sure is that this will have the effect of driving underage users away from effectively age-gated sites to sites which are not age-gated

That’s not for sure though, even according to the article you provided -

The data, first reported by the Financial Times, appears to show the impact of strict age-checking rules from 25 July under the Online Safety Act. However, social media sites that also introduced age checks for material barred to under-18s, such as X and Reddit, did not experience dips in traffic over the same timeframe.

Pornhub can certainly claim that -

A spokesperson for Pornhub said: “As we’ve seen in many jurisdictions around the world, there is often a drop in traffic for compliant sites and an increase in traffic for non-compliant sites.”

But the data reported by the Financial Times indicates otherwise. Perhaps it may be the case that Pornhub are referring to the increase in traffic on their own non-compliant sites (they’re likely getting the data from their parent company Aylo, which owns over 200 adult content platforms), and this increase in traffic is likely due to the publicity generated on platforms like X which originally signalled they would not comply with the legislation, then they did.

That’s not even accounting for the amount of traffic flowing through VPNs which users who wish to protect their privacy are using, meaning they’re cutting off lucrative revenue from platforms like Pornhub because VPN service providers often offer ad blocking as part of their services too.

But it’s not as though adult content platforms like Pornhub would have skin in the game, is it? They’re just providing a public service out of the goodness of their hearts, bless ‘em 😏

corkie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123720506#Comment_123720506

Archive.ph (whitelist) of above linked article!

Have you heard of 'CHAT CONTROL'? It was raised last year on DSA thread, I think?

https://www.euronews.com/next/2025/08/08/return-of-chat-control-something-is-rotten-in-the-state-of-denmark

https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123720506#Comment_123720506

And if you're going to be naive enough to argue that kids won't have that kind of knowledge or skills, well, have a look at what the Collison kids started, for a local example.

It’d be a terrible example as the Collision brothers are the exception, not the norm, and their success was due to having access to financial resources and support that most children will only ever dream of -

https://www.startupgrind.com/blog/the-collison-brothers-and-story-behind-the-founding-of-stripe/

The founders of Zorin OS would be at least a more relatable example of what children are capable of with the benefit of education -

https://itsfoss.com/zorin-os-interview/

I don’t think imagining children being capable of installing VPN software to access Pornhub are in quite the same league in terms of what motivates them tbh, most children aren’t likely to be bothered by not having access to adult content platforms as that’s not their primary use for internet access. They are the target audience however for large online platforms, and the primary concern of legislation regulating online platforms is that children aren’t exposed to content which Government deems inappropriate for children.

FWIW, Stripe prohibits the use of its services for adult content platforms too -

https://stripe.com/en-mx/legal/restricted-businesses