Age verification enters Grid-wide beta

So I don't know if this makes me feel more secure or less...I ended up digging up an old moving bill from FOUR years ago...and used my old name...my old address..and the last 4 of my social and guess what..I verfied!..

Glad it worked...but annoying that it only accepted my info from (and I can't emphasize this enough) FOUR years ago.

Two issues here after downloading the Candidate viewer.

(1) Why can I see my camera controls on my login page? lol

(2) Why isn't the Preferences button available on the login page, or am I missing it?

Or perhaps, Susie, like me they work in an industry where having to prove your age is no big deal and they don't really give much of a crap about proving age. Shrugs. I doubt you'd want me round your place anyway!

what would you say if I told you I just verified an account with my 12yo sons SSN?

I totally believe you! I am considering verifying my identity using a dead relatives ID. He would be 100 years old in February 2008 if he was alive but I betcha LL will issue a press release that they have a 100 year old on SL if I do that.

That's great. The thing that the age verification system is good at doing is verifying your credit history. What the age verification system cannot do is verify your actual age.

Susie, there are any number of reasons others would feel the need to be verified, one of which has been mentioned, renting business or residential in areas that must mark the land as mature content. Especially since LL in all it's wisdom leaves it to us to decide what said content is. Better to be safe is how I think a lot of people will be looking at it, landowners and general residents alike.


Only takes one narrow minded person to report you for what they believe to be offensive content for the whole can of worms to land in your backyard. And there are oh so many narrow minded people in SL these days, you know, the ones whose mission in life it is to make others as miserable as they themselves are.

~B

I would say, "why didn't you try a totally random, but well-formatted number first?" Or, "why didn't you first try ignoring the 'required' indicator and just leaving that field blank." That way, they wouldn't even have your son's SSN, let alone yours. According to some other posts here, you get at least 4 retries. It may even be unlimited retries. All LL knows is that you have a 'Y' or 'N' result from this 3rd party provider. (according to post #32, here: http://blog.secondlife.com
/2007/12/05
/knowledge-base-article-of-the-week-7-age-verification-beta/#comments ) You may have agreed to a TOS with LL, but who the heck are these guys? Get your 'Y' flag and move on.

Wait till each avatar has their credit history with Transunion & Equifax.

As long as it isn't tied to my real life credit rating I'd actually be in favor of that as a risk assessment tool, that could give a good way to tell which avatars have a trustworthy financial history or not when determining say investment risk or transaction risk.

I noticed this myself just now. It look very very bad. Is it even safe to use this viewer?Either the code monkeys really did a nightmare job on this client build. Or i don`t even want to think of the other possibilty. Reguardless its still a mess!

2) You can get to the preferences from the limited menu at the top of the screen.

I am really annoyed that after almost 3 years in SL, I will now be restricted in movement, and activities. No not sex.....those types of activities hold zero interest to me. But I personally am still unsure how this will affect things like skins, or dance clubs, or even shopping in general. All things I like to do with my time in SL

Why am I restricted?
Well now this isn't even by choice......I don't even get the privelidge of deciding NOT to verify. It is forced on me.
How?
Well here in Australia, we can use a Drivers Licence....which I cannot get because of Disability.
Or I can use a Passport. Well I don't have one of these as I have never been overseas. Nor am I about to go pay for one when I am never likely to do so either.

But I am sure I will have to bear those judgemental comments about being under-age........or even eventually not being allowed into SL because I was never given an option to verify.

(and I am sorry, but there is NO WAY I will ever give copies of scanned personal documents to anyone!)

doesnt answer questen.

Hi Amaterasu how are you............

Remeber some and owners can set the degree of user incoming on to the land. If smart sex island and dance clubs with escorts by now will do is NOT to limit age and etc.........Do you think places like orgy island will get vendors if they know the land is restricted to only payment online and age checked? Highly Doubtful.

Sometimes there is no answer for what LL does.

But if some people are wondering HOW TO GET TO IT since it is no longer on the main page then that IS THE ANSWER. Atleast I tried to help...

what is the point of putting at the top? and whats the point of changing the login names and PW buttons etc.........

The Following has NOT been addressed:

What is the garuntee that this third party will
respect the privacy laws and NOT store he info unless
requested?

Is LL Monitoring this third party? Why should we
entrust our privet info to a third party we know
nothing about?

What about security? how securer is this third party?
Who do we hold accountable if a security breach occers
at the third party?

What about third party credentials?

I believe we have the Legal right to view those too.

What garuntees do we have against Identity theft?

I refuse to submit any of my privet info to The third
party untill you guys address ALL my concerns and
questions regarding this issue.
I do NOT feel safe nor secure releasing my privet info
to a third party I know nothing about.

How are we to submit our privet info? by photocopy? By
Scanning into our computers and then E-mailing it?
How much do free accounts have to pay? what about
those of us unable to get a credit card for what ever
reasons or can’t access pay-pal?

Also it's illegal for an online virtual world to
require a users social security number for any reason.
Linden Labs is in Violation.

Rascal Ratelle

I had no trouble. They must have access to Aus license numbers... Yeah right.

There is no Aus license though, they are all state run.

Far as I recall some states give a drivers licence at 16....South Australia, Queensland, New South Wales, West Australia, Tasmania???

So I assume then some one 16 years old can be "Age Verified"?

But LL's position will be that they are not denying your a product or service -- the person who sets the land ban is. Therefore, you will have to act against each landowner, not LL; probably an impossible task.

US residents... putting in your full ZIP+4 (9 digit ZIP code) appears to confuse the verification code. I got failures until I omitted the last four digits. (Already reported to LL...)

WOW! Good Point, Usagi! I forgot about that one.

And Rascal too.

I'm probably the most trusting person I know, but..... I have a hard time believing most companies when they say "Trust Us".

Knowing what I do about Security Online and how to breach it, I really really really REALLY don't trust this method any more than I'd trust a pedophile to babysit my niece.

Yes in Tassie where i am you can get a learner's at 16.

It was a verbatim copy/paste from the blog.
Again:
"Removed the ability to *ban* access to Residents who have provided payment info or who have used payment info. We continue to support the ability to *allow* access to only those who have provided payment info."

I read it right.
You were reading my post (#2 wrong

I was pointing at how LL were now twisting language to avoid attaching a negative connotation to 'No Payment Info'.
There is no practical difference between banning 'No Payment Info' residents and allowing access *only* to 'Payment Info' residents. There is a difference in semantics.


Given that LL changed the language describing access for 'No Payment Info', they
could have used the same language to describe access for 'Unverified' as "the ability to *allow* access to only those who have provided verification info".
The semantic dance is to avoid using terms like "restrict" or "ban" in connection with 'No Payment Info'.

The dance continues into attaching a negative connotation to being Unverified. Landowners with certain types of content will be encouraged/advised to "restrict access to ........" rather than "allow access only to ....."


In the brave new sanitised SL, this will be the NewSpeak:
- No Payment Info is not to be suspect
- Unverified is to be suspect

Unverified are to be the new second class citizens.



Just to head off confusion for the fast readers:
The first sentence of the quoted paragraph clearly describes the current very exotic ability to ban residents who have 'Payment Info'. The second sentence clearly describes the current ability to ban residents who do not have 'Payment Info'.
My post was purely about the language used to describe what is in effect the banning of categories of residents.