Ohio lawmakers introduce competing proposal for online age verification
Rep. Heidi Workman, R-Rootstown, (left) alongside Rep. Phil Plummer, R-Dayton, introducing their legislation. (Photo by Nick Evans, Ohio Capital Journal.)
Ohio lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are concerned about protecting minors on the internet, but how exactly to handle age verification has been a bit of challenge. Now, legislators are offering competing visions for determining an internet users' age.
One of those visions, backed by social media companies like Facebook parent company Meta, would put the onus squarely on app stores. Another, introduced last week, shares responsibility between the app stores and app developers.
A complicated system added to the 2023 state budget was summarily rejected by federal courts earlier this year.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The newest proposal, House Bill 302, is sponsored by state Reps. Heidi Workman, R-Rootstown, and Phil Plummer, R-Dayton. They describe the proposal as a way to split duties between the companies building apps and the ones providing access to those apps.
An app store would act as a kind of dashboard, providing a central location for parental controls, and delivering an 'age signal' to developers so they can determine what user experience is appropriate.
'These duties reflect what app stores are uniquely positioned to do,' Workman said, 'provide infrastructure, support consistency and enable parental oversight in a scalable, privacy-conscious way.'
But the work doesn't end there.
'App developers who understand the intricacies of their own platforms are responsible for implementing practical protections tailored to the risks present in their apps,' she said.
Plummer said their approach ensures developers get no more information than is necessary. The bill also contains safeguards against developers sharing that age information or leveraging children's data for targeted ads.
Plummer said H.B. 302 is 'structured to provide meaningful protections where they're needed, without overreaching into areas where they are not.'
He also said the measure is flexible enough to respond as technology grows and changes.
Part of that flexibility, however, comes from seemingly vague standards and requirements in the bill's language. Apps are only 'covered' if they offer different experiences for adults and minors. Initial determinations about a user's age come down to an estimate, the nature of which is unclear.
Ohio judge permanently blocks social media age verification law
Companies 'may use' tools that are 'commercially reasonable' to estimate a user's age category 'with a reasonable level of certainty proportionate to the risks that arise from access to and use of the relevant service or portion thereof,' according to the bill's language.
Users who are estimated to be a minor can verify their age. The bill doesn't describe how they do so.
It's a notable departure from Ohio's first stab at age verification, known as the Social Media Parental Notification Act. That measure tried to pre-determine every sort of website where adult content might be available, while drafting exceptions for news or commerce sites.
When he put that law on hold, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley called it a 'breathtakingly blunt instrument.' Marbley permanently enjoined the measure last April.
Running parallel to Workman and Plummer's proposal is a competing measure sponsored by state Rep. Melanie Miller, R-Ashland, and state Sen. Michele Reynolds, R-Canal Winchester.
Miller and Reynolds want to put the responsibility for age verification and parental consent on the app store. Meta strongly supports the legislation.
Ohio Republicans propose new social media age verification plan
Jennifer Hanley, who heads up North American safety policy for the company told Ohio lawmakers understanding a user's age is 'fundamental' to providing age-appropriate content, but insisted that responsibility shouldn't fall on her company.
'We think the easiest, most consistent, and most privacy-protective solution is to require app stores to verify age and get a parent's approval any time a teen wants to download an app,' Hanley said.
The method compares to a person buying a six-pack of Budweiser at a store – they show their ID to the cashier, not to the beer company. If app stores are a one-stop-shop for all the games, messaging and social media services a person will download, the app store, not the app company, would determine the age.
But companies who operate app stores, most notably Apple and Google, are uncomfortable with carrying that much responsibility.
As Plummer put it, 'app stores can provide consistent tools (and) centralized access points, but they should not be forced to manage risk they cannot fully access.'
Speaking after the hearing introducing the bill, Workman acknowledged they've been working with app store companies to develop their legislation.
She said they wanted to 'bring all stakeholders to the table.'
Workman said those companies believe the proposal offers a workable solution, but no other state has actually implemented the provisions.
Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
5 minutes ago
- Washington Post
D.C. attorney general alleges violence intervention nonprofit misused funds
The District's attorney general has alleged that a nonprofit group hired by the city misappropriated funds that were supposed to go toward preventing gun violence in the Congress Heights neighborhood. In a lawsuit filed this week by D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb, the city is seeking to recoup more than $250,000 in government funds that went to Women in H.E.E.L.S. (Healing, Elevation, Empowerment, Love, Support) Inc. The group signed an agreement with the attorney general's office in March 2022 to operate one of four new violence-reduction program sites as part of the office's Cure the Streets program, according to the suit.
The Verge
33 minutes ago
- The Verge
Meta held talks to buy Thinking Machines, Perplexity, and Safe Superintelligence
At this point, it's becoming easier to say which AI startups Mark Zuckerberg hasn't looked at acquiring. In addition to Ilya Sutskever's Safe Superintelligence (SSI), sources tell me the Meta CEO recently discussed buying ex-OpenAI CTO Mira Murati's Thinking Machines Lab and Perplexity, the AI-native Google rival. None of these talks progressed to the formal offer stage for various reasons, including disagreements over deal prices and strategy, but together they illustrate how aggressively Zuckerberg has been canvassing the industry to reboot his AI efforts. Now, details about the team Zuckerberg is assembling are starting to come into view: SSI co-founder and CEO Daniel Gross, along with ex-Github CEO Nat Friedman, are poised to co-lead the Meta AI assistant. Both men will report to Alexandr Wang, the former Scale CEO Zuckerberg just paid over $14 billion to quickly hire. Wang told his Scale team goodbye last Friday and was in the Meta office on Monday. This week, he has been meeting with top Meta leaders (more on that below) and continuing to recruit for the new AI team Zuckerberg has tasked him with building. I expect the team to be unveiled as soon as next week. Rather than join Meta, Sutskever, Murati, and Perplexity CEO Aravind Srinivas have all gone on to raise more money at higher valuations. Sutskever, a titan of the AI research community who co-founded OpenAI, recently raised a couple of billion dollars for SSI. Both Meta and Google are investors in his company, I'm told. Murati also just raised a couple of billion dollars. Neither she nor Sutskever is close to releasing a product. Srinivas, meanwhile, is in the process of raising around $500 million for Perplexity. Spokespeople for all the companies involved either declined to comment or didn't respond in time for publication. The Information and CNBC first reported Zuckerberg's talks with Safe Superintelligence, while Bloomberg first reported the Perplexity talks. While Zuckerberg's recruiting drive is motivated by the urgency he feels to fix Meta's AI strategy, the situation also highlights the fierce competition for top AI talent these days. In my conversations this week, those on the inside of the industry aren't surprised by Zuckerberg making nine-figure — or even, yes, 10-figure — compensation offers for the best AI talent. There are certain senior people at OpenAI, for example, who are already compensated in that ballpark, thanks to the company's meteoric increase in valuation over the last few years. Speaking of OpenAI, it's clear that CEO Sam Altman is at least a bit rattled by Zuckerberg's hiring spree. His decision to appear on his brother's podcast this week and say that 'none of our best people' are leaving for Meta was probably meant to convey a position of strength, but in reality, it looks like he is throwing his former colleagues under the bus. I was confused by Altman's suggestion that Meta paying a lot upfront for talent won't 'set up a great culture.' After all, didn't OpenAI just pay $6.5 billion to hire Jony Ive and his small hardware team? When I joined a Zoom call with Alex Himel, Meta's VP of wearables, this week, he had just gotten off a call with Zuckerberg's new AI chief, Alexandr Wang. 'There's an increasing number of Alexes that I talk to on a regular basis,' Himel joked as we started our conversation about Meta's new glasses release with Oakley. 'I was just in my first meeting with him. There were like three people in a room with the camera real far away, and I was like, 'Who is talking right now?' And then I was like, 'Oh, hey, it's Alex.'' The following Q&A has been edited for length and clarity: How did your meeting with Alex just now go? The meeting was about how to make AI as awesome as it can be for glasses. Obviously, there are some unique use cases in the glasses that aren't stuff you do on a phone. The thing we're trying to figure out is how to balance it all, because AI can be everything to everyone or it could be amazing for more specific use cases. We're trying to figure out how to strike the right balance because there's a ton of stuff in the underlying Llama models and that whole pipeline that we don't care about on glasses. Then there's stuff we really, really care about, like egocentric view and trying to feed video into the models to help with some of the really aspirational use cases that we wouldn't build otherwise. You are referring to this new lineup with Oakley as 'AI glasses.' Is that the new branding for this category? They are AI glasses, not smart glasses? We refer to the category as AI glasses. You saw Orion. You used it for longer than anyone else in the demo, which I commend you for. We used to think that's what you needed to hit scale for this new category. You needed the big field of view and display to overlay virtual content. Our opinion of that has definitely changed. We think we can hit scale faster, and AI is the reason we think that's possible. Right now, the top two use cases for the glasses are audio — phone calls, music, podcasts — and taking photos and videos. We look at participation rates of our active users, and those have been one and two since launch. Audio is one. A very close second is photos and videos. AI has been number three from the start. As we've been launching more markets — we're now in 18 — and we've been adding more features, AI is creeping up. Our biggest investment by a mile on the software side is AI functionality, because we think that glasses are the best form factor for AI. They are something you're already wearing all the time. They can see what you see. They can hear what you hear. They're super accessible. Is your goal to have AI supersede audio and photo to be the most used feature for glasses, or is that not how you think about it? From a math standpoint, at best, you could tie. We do want AI to be something that's increasingly used by more people more frequently. We think there's definitely room for the audio to get better. There's definitely room for image quality to get better. The AI stuff has much more headroom. How much of the AI is onboard the glasses versus the cloud? I imagine you have lots of physical constraints with this kind of device. We've now got one billion-parameter models that can run on the frame. So, increasingly, there's stuff there. Then we have stuff running on the phone. If you were watching WWDC, Apple made a couple of announcements that we haven't had a chance to test yet, but we're excited about. One is the Wi-Fi Aware APIs. We should be able to transfer photos and videos without having people tap that annoying dialogue box every time. That'd be great. The second one was processor background access, which should allow us to do image processing when you transfer the media over. Syncing would work just like it does on Android. Do you think the market for these new Oakley glasses will be as big as the Ray-Bans? Or is it more niche because they are more outdoors and athlete-focused? We work with EssilorLuxottica, which is a great partner. Ray-Ban is their largest brand. Within that, the most popular style is Wayfair. When we launched the original Ray-Ban Meta glasses, we went with the most popular style for the most popular brand. Their second biggest brand is Oakley. A lot of people wear them. The Holbrook is really popular. The HSTN, which is what we're launching, is a really popular analog frame. We increasingly see people using the Ray-Ban Meta glasses for active use cases. This is our first step into the performance category. There's more to come. What's your reaction to Google's announcements at I/O for their XR glasses platform and eyewear partnerships? We've been working with EssilorLuxottica for like five years now. That's a long time for a partnership. It takes a while to get really in sync. I feel very good about the state of our partnership. We're able to work quickly. The Oakley Meta glasses are the fastest program we've had by quite a bit. It took less than nine months. I thought the demos they [Google] did were pretty good. I thought some of those were pretty compelling. They didn't announce a product, so I can't react specifically to what they're doing. It's flattering that people see the traction we're getting and want to jump in as well. On the AR glasses front, what have you been learning from Orion now that you've been showing it to the outside world? We've been going full speed on that. We've actually hit some pretty good internal milestones for the next version of it, which is the one we plan to sell. The biggest learning from using them is that we feel increasingly good about the input and interaction model with eye tracking and the neural band. I wore mine during March Madness in the office. I was literally watching the games. Picture yourself sitting at a table with a virtual TV just above people's heads. It was amazing. More to click on: If you haven't already, don't forget to subscribe to The Verge, which includes unlimited access to Command Line and all of our reporting. As always, I welcome your feedback, especially if you've also turned down Zuck. You can respond here or ping me securely on Signal. Thanks for subscribing.
The Verge
37 minutes ago
- The Verge
macOS Tahoe could finally say goodbye to FireWire.
Posted Jun 20, 2025 at 6:29 PM UTC macOS Tahoe could finally say goodbye to FireWire. However, it's still several months before macOS Tahoe is officially released. FireWire support could still return, but the last computer Apple released with the port was the 13-inch 2012 MacBook Pro. macOS Tahoe Beta Drops FireWire Support [
