Digital ID debate thread

  • 🔧 Site instability resolved. You can report double-posts and broken attachments. For bigger issues, use the Technical Grievances thread.
    🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
H

Harry Dresden

All I wanted was a Pepsi
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Mar 3, 2026
If you haven't been living under a rock recently, you have heard about digital ID laws around the world. Many states, including California and Colorado, are talking about age-gating social media, and everybody's favorite slop tubers are making videos talking about how digital ID will doom the internet, with a handful of people supporting digital ID, so I figured it would be a good idea to make a debate thread to see Kiwi Farms' thoughts on the matter, so here are the arguments for and against digital ID that I have seen.
Pro Digital ID arguments
  1. Think of the children.
  2. Digital ID will reduce bots on social media
  3. it should be harder for kids to access adult websites, and digital ID helps with that.
  4. Neglectful parents can't be trusted to raise their own kids.
  5. Bonus argument: Digital ID reduces "hate speech."
Anti Digital ID arguments
  1. Parents should raise their kids not the government
  2. Digital ID will lead to censorship
  3. Politicians support digital ID, but what about Epstein?
  4. Digital ID is a threat to privacy as evidenced by discords ID leak
  5. Bonus argument: trans kids need to have access to adult websites so they can be groomed explore their trans identity, according to a California congress"woman"
 
Last edited:
What is there to debate? This is scary as fuck and I am against it.

I don't care about social media bots, and I don't believe for a second this will stop kids accessing porn. Hate speech is a made up offense.
 
I think it's rich that all the pieces of shit pushing for this legislation are IN the Files. They like to hide their insidious true intentions behind a veil of moral superiority. "Think of the kids!" comes off as more of a Trojan horse, one that they can use to label any opposition to their growing surveillance state as a nonce.

Persona, which is one of the biggest AI-powered facial ID scanners (which is being implemented by the likes of Discord and Roblox); was hacked recently, and they discovered DIRECT links to prove that all the biometric data they were collecting was getting sent straight to the government via Anthropic and Palantir.

We raised hell when China implemented a similar AI-powered mass surveillance network, but now the Jewish pedo cabal that runs Washington is pushing for that same exact shit in the US. A complete erosion of our First and Fourth Amendment rights, disguised as a measure to "protect minors".

I don't remember offhand if it was Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson; but one of the Founding Fathers once said that "people who would trade liberty for safety deserve neither".
 
BIG NO. This is a parental issue, not a site issue. Not to mention it is a huge opsec risk. No ID, anywhere. The Internet should be the wild west.
 
Obscene Majesty said:
We raised hell when China implemented a similar AI-powered mass surveillance network, but now the Jewish pedo cabal that runs Washington is pushing for that same exact shit in the US. A complete erosion of our First and Fourth Amendment rights, disguised as a measure to "protect minors".
Click to expand...

Hell, I’d rather give my personal data over to the Chinese government. They couldn’t care less about what I have to say and if they send a large breasted honey pot they’re going to be sorely disappointed by the nonsense I tell her.

Zion Don and Loomer are literally created a bad goy registry.
 
I can't even play devils advocate because under no circumstance will the id shit stop what it's claiming to. Kid's will just have an older person buy them an id to browse porn same way they'd get someone to rent them R rated movies. Also the idea that removing the anonymous online mask will deter anything is goofy, i've seen plenty of wild shit on facebook. You still can't get hit through the internet.

My only in favor argument is that it will make the internet so fake and gay that it will trigger a mass exodus, so I'm for it.
 
The ID shit is such bullshit if they gave a single care they'd just make a law parents have to follow like "Don't give your kids alcohol, or don't let your 10-year old drive on the freeway" but for using the Internet. We don't need kids on the Internet anyways the governments and predators do, plus why do total strangers have to be the ones to come to a child's defense on the Internet far too late when their parents don't give a shit and let the same thing happen over and over?
 
XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG said:
Can you even have a debate if only one side has any representation?
Because I certainly hope that nobody on KF is in favor of digital ID
And I doubt anyone has the inclination, resilience to ridicule, and competence to play devil's advocate for a pro-ID position
Click to expand...
I will play devil's advocate. Digital ID is good because it prevents kids from watching porn, and it prevents kids from getting addicted to social media. Also, YouTubers like that guy—I forgot his name—who made his entire channel "DIGITAL ID WILL DESTROY THE WEB" are annoying. Other than that, I'm kind of surprised when searching "digital ID" on YouTube; everyone from conservative Christians like CBN and Glenn Beck to even liberals are united in opposing digital ID. Honestly, I figured Christians might be more sympathetic to digital ID, but I was completely wrong. If someone can debunk the "preventing kids from watching porn" argument, I can't really think of a good reason to support digital ID.
 
Taser Confetti said:
Hell, I’d rather give my personal data over to the Chinese government. They couldn’t care less about what I have to say and if they send a large breasted honey pot they’re going to be sorely disappointed by the nonsense I tell her.
Click to expand...
wait until you hear about the social credit system, where you loose every privilege when you criticize your eventual new overlords, and dont behave like a good transparent law abider
 
LongTallTexan said:
I will play devil's advocate.
Click to expand...
I respect that. I'll argue respectfully and rigorously against the points you raise

LongTallTexan said:
Digital ID is good because it prevents kids from watching porn
Click to expand...
What exactly is the principle here? Because, by itself, "kids should not watch porn" does not get you "everyone should have to identify themselves to access parts of the Internet"
If a parent fails to supervise their child, that is a parental failure. If a website wants stricter access controls on its own property, that is a site-level choice. But what Digital ID does is take a local problem and answer it with a general-purpose identity infrastructure. It's basically like saying "some minors shoplift booze, therefore every adult should have to scan government papers before entering any store that sells beer".
That is, I'm not saying "underage drinking/porn is bad/good", but rather that the proposed remedy builds a wider control mechanism than is warranted by the problem. And once that mechanism exists, it does not remain confined to porn, for then you get age checks, then identity checks, then platform access conditions, then speech filtering, then "safety" compliance.
The important bit is the technical structure, for a system built to decide who may access X can be extended at any time to decide who may access Y.

Essentially, the side in favor of Digital ID needs to prove more than "this might help stop some kids". It would need to prove why the state, or a state-linked credential layer, should sit between persons and online services in the first place, and why parents, device controls, filters, contracts, and site-specific rules are somehow insufficient unless everyone gets a verification regime imposed on them.
 
LongTallTexan said:
I will play devil's advocate. Digital ID is good because it prevents kids from watching porn, and it prevents kids from getting addicted to social media. Also, YouTubers like that guy—I forgot his name—who made his entire channel "DIGITAL ID WILL DESTROY THE WEB" are annoying. Other than that, I'm kind of surprised when searching "digital ID" on YouTube; everyone from conservative Christians like CBN and Glenn Beck to even liberals are united in opposing digital ID. Honestly, I figured Christians might be more sympathetic to digital ID, but I was completely wrong. If someone can debunk the "preventing kids from watching porn" argument, I can't really think of a good reason to support digital ID.
Click to expand...
Some Christians and other people like conspiracy theorists argued then digital ID is the mark of the beast.
 
I have no qualms about like a government website where you can have your ID connected to an account. It'd be nice to have as an alternative to carrying around a physical ID for like buying booze or driving. Sometimes I wanna drive somewhere and don't wanna bring my wallet, if I could have my ID on my phone that would he cool.
It gets gay and 1984 when you HAVE to have a digital ID to connect to the Internet.

Also when I was in highschool kids as young as 14 were buying MDMA and opioids, not to mention weed and alcohol. Laws and age restrictions never work because kids don't give a fuck and will do whatever they want. The moment you have to show ID to watch porn there will be a million tiktoks showing kids how to download tor and find porn on there without IDs. There is NO real argument about protecting the kids.
 
Last edited:
LongTallTexan said:
  1. Think of the children.
  2. Digital ID will reduce bots on social media
  3. it should be harder for kids to access adult websites, and digital ID helps with that.
  4. Neglectful parents can't be trusted to raise their own kids.
  5. Bonus argument: Digital ID reduces "hate speech."
Click to expand...
These arguments are all ridiculous at best so lets pull them apart.

1) That's not an argument, its bullshit right out of the gate. It's a manipulative appeal to emotion trotted out by power hungry sociopaths every time they want you to go along with some sort of bullshit that will provide them more power and you less freedom or rights. Any one using that statement seriously should be distrusted.

2) I can grant you this argument to the extent covers small time actors or parties potentially. Do you genuinely think nation states or corporations are going to abide by this premise? Because I'm entirely sure, just based on the ability to observe patterns that this is not going to apply to the big fish at all. Which means the propaganda will continue.

3) In the most tenuous sense. Although that is like me arguing that it's difficult or impossible to drink or drive a motor vehicle without a licence or ID which might be true, but also completely ignores the fact that the primary thing stopping me prior to the age of consent were these new things called parents/guardians. The only place where this argument might have a vague analogy would be a bar, although usually that comes down to carding people who look like minors rather than carding everyone who attempts to enter. A better idea might be for the porn industry to do what always does (i.e pioneer novel tech) and figure out a way to filter out minors while leaving everyone else alone.

4) So because some parents are neglectful and have been forever we suddenly insist that EVERYONE must be identified. This again is a manipulative appeal to emotion trotted out by power hungry sociopaths every time they want you to go along with some sort of bullshit that will provide them more power and you less freedom or rights. Any one using that statement seriously should be distrusted.

5) How? Because people are now tied to the comments they make in public? Have you been online at any point in the last 10 years? People state vile shit with their actual names all the time - but it's tolerated and even celebrated when acceptable targets are white/conservative. If it does 'reduce' hate speech - all that really means is that it will further entrench and reenforce the current establishment bullshit.
Nicholas Gur said:
My only in favor argument is that it will make the internet so fake and gay that it will trigger a mass exodus, so I'm for it.
Click to expand...
This is the only pro-argument I'd submit. It'll kill the internet and force a containment breach which is going just make the problem for our idiot rulers worse.

Edit: OP's account is 2 days old. This should get interesting.
 
Last edited:
Super-Chevy454 said:
Some Christians and other people like conspiracy theorists argued then digital ID is the mark of the beast
Click to expand...
I think it would be easy to claim many things are the mark of the beast. I'm sure if rome demanded a branding of caesars face to do trade it would be called such. We kinda already have the mark when we carry around rfid chip cards and cellphones everywhere. Personally I think the concept of the mark will dissuade any government body from ever physically requiring these id's but I expect them to be forced onto everyone since they will be necessary for central bank digital currency, and the gen generation of gimmes to facilitate full herd domestication.

The real mark of the beast is actually your SSN
 
Digital ID is effectively a form of censorship. No one’s going to want to post wrongthink when their account is tied to their real identity. And the people who are smart enough not to comply will be driven out of the Internet, effectively preventing their ideas from ever spreading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom