The ESRB wants to start using facial scanning technology to check peoples ages

The ESRB wants to start using facial scanning technology to check people's ages​

Link to Original

Andy Chalk
Mon, 24 July 2023 at 4:52 pm GMT-5·3-min read

Remember a couple years ago, when Chinese gaming giant Tencent began using facial recognition to keep the kids from playing too many videogames? It turns out that the Entertainment Software Rating Board, North America's videogame rating agency, is looking to do something quite similar.

The ESRB, along with digital identity company Yoti and Epic Games-owned "youth digital media" company SuperAwesome, have filed a proposal with the FTC seeking approval for a new "verifiable parental consent mechanism" called Privacy-Protective Facial Age Estimation. Simply put, the parent takes a selfie, assisted by an "auto face capture module," which is then analyzed by the system to ensure it's the face of an adult, who can then grant whatever permissions are required. The entire process of verification takes less than a second "on average," and images are permanently deleted after the verification is complete.

"The upload of still images is not accepted, and photos that do not meet the required level of quality to create an age estimate are rejected," the filing states. "These factors minimize the risk of circumvention and of children taking images of unaware adults."

Of course, kids outsmarting the system isn't the only risk at play here. Accuracy strikes me as the big one, given that facial recognition technology is so notoriously racist: A study conducted in the US, for instance, found that Asian and African American people were up to 100 times more likely to be incorrectly identified by facial recognition systems than white people. And maybe I'm underestimating the magic at work here but determining whether someone is 16 or 18 based on a single selfie also strikes me as a real roll of the dice. The ESRB dismissed concerns about the "fairness" of the system, however, saying that "the difference in rejection rates between gender and skin tone is very small."

"The data suggests that for those between 25 and 35, 15 out of 1,000 females vs 7 out of 1,000 males might be incorrectly classified as under-25 (and would have the option of verifying using another method)," the filing states. "The range of difference by skin tone is between 8 out of 1,000 vs 28 out of 1,000. While bias exists, as is inherent in any automated system, this is not material, especially as compared to the benefits and the increase in access to certain groups of parents."

It's important to note that none of this is proposed as a replacement for current systems: Instead, the ESRB presented its facial age verification plan as "an additional, optional verification method" that will be of particular use to people who don't have photo ID. In a statement send to PC Gamer, Yoti also noted that the system works without actually recognizing or identifying individuals: Instead, the technology simply estimates the age of the image it sees.

That's all good, but in my eyes it doesn't change the fact that, yeah, this really is a gross invasion of privacy—I sure as hell don't want to be sharing my mug with the Great Digital Overmind just so my hypothetical kid can play some GTA Online. Quite honestly, I also don't think relying on potentially-dodgy technology to enforce our social mores is such a great idea to begin with. And come on, does anyone seriously think that a sharp 16-year-old won't have this system beat in about 15 minutes anyway?

The ESRB actually made its request to the FTC back on June 2, but it's only come to light now (via GamesIndustry) because the FTC is now seeking public comment on the plan. If you'd like to share your thoughts, you've got until August 21 to do so at federalregister.gov.
 
videogames:
"Please present your photo ID with your full dox, or scan your face and let us run God knows what software on you to verify your age, and we pinky promise we won't sell any of this data to advertisers"

hardcore videos of a lady gettin' her butthole hollowed out by an entire football team:
"Just click [I Agree] and we'll take your word that you're over 18"
 
Unenforceable. The ESRB hasn't had a reason to exist for a very long time. Parents never understood game ratings the same way they understand film ratings. The entire endeavor has been nothing but a grift.
Any parent that would allow their child to send video of themselves to an unaccountable organization is much much worse than a parent that allows little Timmy to play Call of Troons and deserves the rope.
 
Modern gaming is paying $70 and eventually more for half-assed incomplete content, bugs, DRM, your account get deleted for being too inactive and all your games lost, you can get banned and lose everything just for saying a no no word, devs and publishers outright say they despise you or push agenda nonsense, gamers actively pushing for the loss of their consumer rights because they think companies are their friends, and now this
Yet despite all this, there are still people who still play modern games and gladly fork over their money to these people and then wonder why modern gaming is so bad and it makes glad i've always more or less been a retro fag
 
Accuracy strikes me as the big one, given that facial recognition technology is so notoriously racist: A study conducted in the US, for instance, found that Asian and African American people were up to 100 times more likely to be incorrectly identified by facial recognition systems than white people.
Yeah, I wonder what could make the computer think Ching Chong Ding Dong faces could look more similar to one another than white people's?

Must be racism!
 
and Epic Games-owned "youth digital media" company SuperAwesome,
Guess who owns 40% of shares in Epic Games
1690318019700.png
Guess what company has already been insidiously stealing data from users through Epic Online Services and through their spyware launcher that was illegally rifling through private local Steam files. Perhaps Epic Games needs a community watch (if there isn't one already), Tim Sweeney himself is a hypocritical lolcow and all the people that gunt guard Epic are just as much.

I don't really want to put together an OP for a thread, but if someone else wants to, check r/FuckEpic and r/TimCriticizesTim as a starting point.
 
Last edited:
This feels unenforceable, but it sounds retarded enough that I can see the ESRB actually trying to push this through. Good thing modern video games are mostly garbage, so if there's ever been a good jumping off point for a hobby, this might be it.
I jumped off a long time ago, with an occasional exception for a few good classics. I don't give a fuck about modern gaming though, outside of maybe VR once the bugs are worked out. It still looks clunky and uncomfortable to use though.

Doesn't surprise me that ESRB are retarded, it seems that everyone is huffing glue out of a plastic bag and then writing down any ideas they get afterwards.
 
Back