I’m not in support of trying to control what people do. And I’m guessing those for it tend to be in support if they believe they won’t be subjected to it themselves, but would suddenly shift if they found themselves under the same policy.

That’s how it usually seems to go. Individuals thinking they are above the policy and in a special class. Believing it’s others that need controlling and not themselves.

It’s only good until you realize how much it starts demanding identification and biometrics to properly implement. Just look at some of the laws being passed in the states in the name of protecting people. It’s that type of stuff that gradually leads to pseudonym websites like reddit or lemmy to erode away into more Meta type ones that lock your account until you send them photos of your identification.

Need to look past the this sounds like a good ideology and more into what are they going to start requiring when it comes to your daily use of tech. Of course only appealing to ideologies and buying into it is what governments lean on.

Sounds it’s just parental controls? So easily bypassed if parents don’t care.

Probably not. If those are tied to accounts then people could use password resets to get access, and that might be something Google might want to avoid getting involved in.

For sites that fully embrace the new web environment integrity procedure would that break chromium browsers like Brave too?