I just came back to this, the linked site is a conservative think tank/ advocacy group.

So I looked into this source and its references. I will simply point out the group itself is a conservative think tank and most of the sources are the same.

I’m generally opposed to strict verification. To me the only thing that could justify it is a repeatable study that shows causation between something that the verification would restrict and a negative (not moral panic negative) outcome. Whenever its brought up the “think of the children” comments come out and I am skeptical. It often sounds like video games cause violence excuses. I wanted to know if there was actual justification because to me it seems like they are usually pushed by either religious groups or some group that wants to hoover up data. I have yet to see something beyond moral panic justifying the push.

No, I’m looking for studies either way. Several have been linked here and I’ve glanced at them and plan on reading them a bit more in depth when I get some time.

A lot of what you said is what I have seen when I looked into this before, and part of why I asked the question.

Yes like that. I’ll have to dive into the sources presented.

But your Efficacy, risks and invasiveness, are predicated on the need. If there is no need, the secondary discussion becomes redundant.

And I’m not saying there isn’t a need, but I would like evidence to support the need.

Thanks for the link, I’ll peruse and see what I see.

The question is what is the evidence based justification for the strict verification that is being pushed. The efficacy and implementation is a different question entirely.

More of the first one you mentioned. I tried once, and I had little luck. I found one that had what I thought was poor methodology. I didn’t keep a link.

For self hosting there is also https://forgejo.org/ which is a fork of https://about.gitea.com/ , the latter of which started to shift to a corporate model.

I don’t know if this is part of the case, but browsers basically control standards, and with the size of chrome, that means google controls the standards. The browser is a big aspect of the ad pipeline. Because they have the browser they could direct page views to themselves more than they do by using amp links. Even with blocking cookies and such, chrome still sends data back to google. There was the whole logon scheme they were pushing (I don’t remember the name) that only chrome would be able to do. There is a lot you can direct to yourself if you control the main access method.