Hey! This is a really neat project, especially considering your age.
That being said, I’m confused by why what is essentially a beginner learning project is being wrapped in language that makes it sound like a Series B startup.
I think the idea that it’s a trust issue is broadly correct. “Free vibe-coded anonymous Linux server with root access” immediately causes every infrastructure and security neuron in my body to fire at once.
Thank you for your feedback I really appreciate it.
I think everyone sees it in a similar way and that is why it does not work. But the reality is that it should work for regular users and abusers should be blocked. Also - you get a subdomain, but not a public IP, that would not be possible. SMTP is blocked, port scanning detection is active, crypto mining detection as well, DDoS too as well as many other things.
Broadly I agree that you can’t expect organizations to change their behaviour without changing the incentives. That’s essentially my argument in favour of the platform accountability portions of the bill.
Where I disagree is the framing that it’s a binary between “age verification for all” or “legal liability for parents”. There is a third option: change the incentives for the organizations designing and operating the systems children are using.
Regulate recommender systems, addictive defaults, reporting and appeal mechanisms, non-consensual intimate imagery response, synthetic sexual abuse material, dark patterns, safety plans, transparency, audits, and penalties for platforms that fail to respond properly. Those are all aimed at the organizations creating or amplifying the harm. This is, admittedly, the most difficult approach, but it’s also the approach that actually addresses the root cause.
My concern is that an under-16 account ban turns the enforcement problem into an age-assurance problem for all users. The platform has to determine who is under 16 somehow, which means assessing everyone’s age. That creates privacy and access-control infrastructure while the most vulnerable teenagers are also the ones most likely to route around it.
So yes, change incentives. I just think the incentives should be aimed directly at platform conduct and design, not at making everyone prove they are old enough to participate online.
Without removing the incentive to profit from users interacting with the platform, I'm deeply skeptical that the profit incentive can in any way be meaningfully be defused by regulation. The threat is existential to social media.
I also agree that parents taking zero accountability for their kids is BS. I think we are due for some improved tooling to provide for parents to monitor and control internet access. I'm tired of parents acting like there is nothing they can do except support broad invasion of privacy and anonimity with no regard for the cultural and political repercussions.
I’d be cautious about saying OpenBSD itself is directly affected. It really depends on if OpenBSD counts as an “electronic service provider”.
You do raise a pretty good point though, Canada has long benefited from being perceived as a relatively trustworthy jurisdiction. So even if OpenBSD themselves are out of scope, there is a negative reputational hit that will impact Canadian tech.
That being said, I’m confused by why what is essentially a beginner learning project is being wrapped in language that makes it sound like a Series B startup.