Apparently you can’t fucking read. […]

That would be you, because you keep being wrong with virtually every single line. Here’s how it goes with pseudosignatures:

You make an account with Valve. Valve has previously received the appropriate certificate to perform age verification from the state, so Valve does not communicate with the state now: They present their certificate to the hardware chip in YOUR ePerso, which then creates a pseudonymous signature to send back to Valve that digitally proves the legal age of whoever the ePerso belongs to (and nothing more).

But go ahead and keep licking that technofascist boot.

No thanks, but you go right ahead - someone entrenched in blind ideology is for sure not an ideal mark.

Have you even bothered to do any research at all into what pseudosignatures are and how they can be used? Or are you just trolling?

Valve could simply set up an instance of an eID server software and get a digital certificate for it authorized by our respective national PKI chain. Functionally the same to how TLS certificate chains work. There is zero technical need for any information to flow between Valve and any other party - the state or otherwise - about who is being age verified. And Valve would not be able to get any information about you other than what I’ve already explained.

Seriously, the brainrot on here seems to be as bad as on Reddit. And btw: This has been state-of-the-art for more than ten years.

The eID of the ePerso supports pseudosignatures, which allows the seller to only get to know “This ePerso belongs to someone of legal age who also knows its PIN” and the state to only know “someone I [the state] authorized to perform age verification did so”. That is privacy-preserving by any reasonable measure.

They’re not. The seller just has to verify customer age, same as when e.g. buying alcohol in the supermarket or entering a gambling hall.

Valve has simply been refusing to do so, even though eID makes privacy-preserving age verification trivial, frankly.