The government's justification is that age verification prevents children from accessing inappropriate content and helps identify extremists. But as one Reddit commenter noted: "Right-wing extremist is the new bogeyman since 'protect the children,' 'illegal immigration,' and 'foreign threats' are becoming less of a narrative shield."

That's cynical but not wrong. Governments have a long history of expanding surveillance powers under one justification, then using those powers for entirely different purposes once they're in place. Age verification infrastructure built to protect children becomes a tool for monitoring political speech. Extremism monitoring expands to include activists, protesters, and anyone the government deems problematic.

The technical reality is that age verification doesn't work as advertised. Kids are remarkably good at bypassing controls, whether through VPNs, borrowed accounts, or fake IDs. Meanwhile, adults who value privacy are forced to hand over data to companies with mixed security records and governments with expanding surveillance appetites.

There's a legitimate problem with extremism on gaming platforms. Online spaces have been used to radicalize young men, spread white supremacist ideology, and organize violent actions. That's real, and platforms have a responsibility to address it.

But the solution isn't mass surveillance. It's better moderation, smarter algorithms, and platform design that doesn't amplify extremist content. Valve already has moderation tools, community reporting, and policies against hate speech. They could be enforced better, but that doesn't require turning every gamer into a biometric data point.

Australia's approach to online regulation has become increasingly aggressive in recent years. The government has passed laws requiring tech platforms to remove content quickly, imposed fines for non-compliance, and pushed for greater control over what Australians can access online.

Some of that is justified – platforms have been slow to moderate harmful content, and regulation can push them to act faster. But when the regulation crosses into surveillance, privacy invasion, and government control over online speech, it's worth asking whether the cure is worse than the disease.

Critics have pointed out that the same government demanding age verification and extremism monitoring just implemented a VPN requirement for accessing adult content, another privacy-invasive measure justified by protecting children.

Mate, there's a whole continent down here, and right now the government is building a surveillance infrastructure one "won't someone think of the children" excuse at a time. By the time people realize what's been built, it'll be too late to dismantle it.