Age Verification -- When ?

I'd count your undies when it's wash day, make sure you take as many back off the line as you hung up ... just in case

There are already several people here that are willing to count my undies.

and as many unwilling to discount them!

Oh .. and oops!

.

Bipartisan bill to limit use of Social Security numbers


Top members of the House Ways and Means Committee from both parties want to limit the use of your Social Security number by government and business in order to crack down on identity theft, a growing scourge in society.

A bill they introduced Monday falls short of an outright ban on using the number for governmental or business purposes, but its sponsors say it would help reduce the amount of identity theft. The question is whether the exceptions allowed under the bill would still give identity thieves enough room to operate. Time will tell, as they say.
...

The measure, introduced by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the powerful committee, and Rep. James McCrery (R-La.), the ranking GOP member, results from 16 hearings conducted by the panel's Social Security subcommittee, headed by Rep. Michael McNulty (D-N.Y.). Also supporting it is the subcommittee's ranking Republican, Rep. Sam Johnson of Texas.

It should pass easily with such strong bipartisan support. The only question is whether it should be tougher.
...

It would ban federal, state and local governments from selling Social Security numbers, but with some exceptions. These include purposes such as tax collection, research, facilitating law enforcement and national security, ensuring the accuracy of insurance underwriting, and administering the Fair Credit Act. Further exceptions could be made by regulation.

...

The private sector could not sell or purchase Social Security numbers but there's a long list of exceptions, such as: For law enforcement, national security, health or safety emergency situations, and tax purposes. Also, the exceptions include ensuring the accuracy of credit and insurance information, in connection with the sale, lease for merger of a business, for some research, and "with the individual's affirmative, written consent."

...

"Identity theft ruins individuals good names and destroys their credit ratings," McNulty said. "Identity thieves have stolen the homes of elderly retirees and have caused innocent persons to be arrested when crimes are committed under a falsified name. It is time to have some common-sense limits on the use of Social Security numbers by government and business in order to reduce their easy availability and ensure the privacy of private information."

"Identity theft has victimized millions and cost businesses billions," said McCrery. "This bill achieves a necessary balance by enhancing Social Security privacy, yet allowing the use of Social Security numbers for legitimate and necessary purposes.”

Johnson said national security is involved. “In this era, foiling identity thieves is not just about protecting peoples’ hard-earned savings and credit – it is also about protecting our nation from terrorists,” he said.


http://blogs.trb.com/news/politics/blog/2007/07/bipartisan_bill_to_limit_use_o.html

or just remove them

*Grins*

I like that option, what does she need with all those undies anyway?

What they need is protection against being found guilty of violating US law with regard to making certain sexually-oriented material available to minors. It seems likely that the information you list isn't enough, for the simple reason that it really isn't proof.

However, the right way for them to get this protection is to get the same status as ISPs, who after all aren't liable when little Johnnie downloads porn over their cable or dsl lines. It's not to get sworn affidavits from each of us.

Hmm... Maybe they should have simply taken that position from the start on. But they got scared and promised to do something.

Of course the thing that should really happen is to change the prudish legislation all over the world that allows minors to watch violence, but forbids them to watch sex.

Did I say something stupid?

Umm .. is that why Tom & Jerry have been removed from our screens? ... cos there was too much sex in it?!?

Its that BEN & JERRY`S

Ben and Jerry's can be pretty sexy

specially when its metlng and dripping over someone ...

A simple "I am over 18" checkbox seems to suffice for every other Adult oriented site I've visited.

There is some new information about how and why Aristotle/Integrity will store our personal information. This information came in a recent telephone interview of Michael Colopy of Aristotle by Pixel Pulse Magazine.

The bottom line is that contrary to the Blog post by Daniel Linden, THERE IS NO GOVERNMENTAL REQUIREMENT TO KEEP A 2 YEAR AUDIT TRAIL. Copoly stated that : " [A] record of the verification process is retained so the company could re-examine it if there was “an overwhelming legal requirement to do so.” And further note that it would appear that Aristotle would store our personal information indefinitely.

Another important piece of information was given by Copoly: Namely that ARISTOTLE ONLY REQUIRES: SOMEONE'S NAME, DATE OF BIRTH, AND A PARTIAL OR COMPLETE ADDRESS." Any further information requirement such as passport info or social security number info would be solely at LL's option.

You can read the full interview here:

http://www.slpixelpulse.com/2007/05/27/your-world-your-imagination-your-first-life-identity/


.

Wow..Danny really is an idiot, isnt he? Name, DOB, address. That's fine. I have no problem with that. I still not total comfortable with Aristotle's reputation for not selling the info, though.

If only ..

Instead I think hes not an idiot - but instead his agenda doesnt coincide with our best interests.

Perhaps, but is it HIS agenda, or Lindens?If it's his alone and he is announcing it out of turn, then he is a idiot.

Listening to the video it sounds like on those subjects HE thinks HE decides the agenda.

Especially when he comments about "legacy ideas" like PG/Mature Land.