Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

effort.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 724 posts

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#281

Post by Magnusmaster »

judge2020 wrote: post #218
Aurornis wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s weird to see that locking down devices even further is being proposed as a solution to anything. The unspoken part of this requirement is that websites would have to block users who aren’t connecting via one of these attested, verified, locked down devices. There is the obvious loophole that using a VPN to a country without these requirements would circumvent it. That’s how kids are already circumventing age res…

Locked down devices are kind of the only solution that both (A) preserves privacy and (B) solves the problem. However, it indeed strips a user of the freedom to use their device in the way that they want; although, safe to say that the US doesn't have all that much problem with that, given Apple's continued market dominance. The alternative is what we're getting right now: laws that require verifying ID documents, of…

Locked down devices will never preserve privacy since the government can just mandate spyware that you won't be able to remove.

There is no form of digital ID that isn't evil, but anything requiring attestation is super evil.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#282

Post by Finbel »

spawarotti wrote: post #253
slopinthebag wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Following this logic, shouldn’t we all just do nothing and parish in the same spot we’re standing in? Or perhaps you’re not actually following the logic but rather an oversimplified characterization of it?

I am still curious: when is it acceptable to hope that something is actually going to work well enough when handed over to the government?

Firefighters, schools, tax collection, well fare programs

Or are you suggesting these would turn as problematic as zero-privacy surveillance systems in case the government becomes totalitarian?

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#283

Post by drivebyhooting »

esikich wrote: post #242
Aurornis wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I dunno if you can legislate “better parental control ux”, If we must have something, I’m in favor of the OS-level flag where a parent can set the device as belonging to a minor and the apps and browser can receive the flag. Lock it behind the most basic parental controls that can be protected and remotely monitored. There are some loopholes with kids downloading apps that allow custom web requests without the flag…

just add a flag to the OS What a fucking stupid, impossible, idea. Like, explain to me how you think this could be done meaningfully other than some setting that can just be arbitrarily flipped without adding massive complexity.

How is it impossible? The OS already advertises which codecs and cyphers it accepts. Is adding an age flag a bridge too far?

And arbitrarily changed? Can a regular user arbitrarily change the super user password?

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#284

Post by ytoawwhra92 »

chr15m wrote: post #254

The right people to protect children are those responsible for them - their parents and guardians. If there is a problem with children not being sufficiently protected, that is the level at which to solve it. Give families tools and information to do so.

No ID checks at clubs, bars, or other adults-only venues.

No school zone speed limits, or protected crossings on streets near schools.

No requirements for railings on public balconies, fencing around public pools, protective covers over drains or other holes in the ground.

Parents/guardians can just supervise.

Sounds great!

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#285

Post by Finbel »

kraken_cult wrote: post #192
paulryanrogers wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OK, but following this logic, shouldn't we disband the government altogether and have mafias rule us all? Conservatives seem to be fine with mafia rule, so long as the don has the correct party affiliation. > When is it acceptable to hope that something is actually going to work well enough when handed over to the government? Mob rule doesn't with very well as a defacto government, or oligarchy. Nor food and drug s…

US is currently recovering (fever breaking) from the petty and micromanaged stage. We haven't been coherent as a nation for like 20+ years.

Seen from the outside, the US seemed a lot more coherent pre-Trump.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#286

Post by CookieCrisp »

spawarotti wrote: post #250
Terr_ wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OK, but following this logic, shouldn't we disband the government altogether and have mafias rule us all? Only if "following this logic" means "extrapolate to an unreasonable extreme." Compare: 1. "Just eat healthy food and you'll be healthy!" 2. "Yes, but [things are complex]" 3. "Following that logic, we should just eat trash."

I am still curious: when is it acceptable to hope that something is actually going to work well enough when handed over to the government?

When the consequences of the government not abusing it isn’t devastating.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#287

Post by speedstyle »

Aurornis wrote: post #179
josh_p wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the other commenter who replied to you. I don’t think this comes from actual parents. And the article suggests this latest push is from right-leaning groups whose goals are surveillance and censorship. That said, I’m a father of 3. I’m a millennial and tech worker. I have the digital literacy to teach my kids about the internet and its horrors in a safe way. Not every parent does, so passing this off as…

> I dunno if you can legislate “better parental control ux”, If we must have something, I’m in favor of the OS-level flag where a parent can set the device as belonging to a minor and the apps and browser can receive the flag. Lock it behind the most basic parental controls that can be protected and remotely monitored. There are some loopholes with kids downloading apps that allow custom web requests without the flag…

It doesn't have to be sent anywhere, websites should send a flag when serving various types of content, so parental controls has the information it needs for filtering. Websites could still infer what's being filtered of course, but doing the decision on the client allows for much more granular/extensible categories of content, as well as allowlisting, time limits, etc. Some sites/proxies won't be marked properly, but 99% self-categorizing would help a lot, and it's not like making them do ID checks or attestation is easier than setting an HTTP header or something

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#288

Post by kelseyfrog »

autoexec wrote: post #279
kelseyfrog wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but that is simply wrong. You're confusing desire/intention with incentive. Someone may have a desire or intention to lose weight. But unless they lose the weight they lack incentive. It's simple: incentives incite action. Don't make it more complicated to win an argument.

> Someone may have a desire or intention to lose weight. But unless they lose the weight they lack incentive. Here are just some of the incentives overweight people have to lose weight: They'll look better, to themselves and others. They'll have more clothing options. They'll feel better. They'll be healthier. They'll have drastically lower odds of many future heath problems. They'll live longer which means they can…

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incentive

It literally says incite "to determination or action". Given that parents aren't actually taking smart phones away, neither determination nor action are present.

I'll grant you the examples you give incite people to desire to change weight just as negative consequences incite parents to desire that "something should be done," but it doesn't incite them to actually do something.

Describing something as incentive because it incites desire without changing behavior is not exactly what I think of when I think of incentives.

Think of being in the position of trying to come up with incentives for a group of people. Would you call your incentives successful if they created a desire in that group without anyone actually doing anything differently?

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#289

Post by gorgoiler »

iamnothere wrote: post #172
drivebyhooting wrote: post #34

Like it or not, there is a large constituency who wants to “protect the children”. By demonizing them and failing to engage with the worries over social media and pornography We have brought it on ourselves. Is it to be wondered at that many people are angry when tech companies have polluted the commons with their effluvium?

There is a term for this: a moral panic. Believe it or not, sometimes the best answer is to do nothing until the crowd moves on to the next panic, as with the “Satanic Panic” in the 1980s. Turns out D&D was not actually a gateway to Satan worship.

If we’re talking 80s, a better comparison would be He-Man.

The FTC let the free-market run riot with children’s TV. Shows used commercials to push expensive plastic toys. The shows themselves became commercials for their associated product lines. Parents felt unable to resist the social pressure channeled through their children and congress eventually passed an act that let the FCC reign in the FTC’s damage.

In the 2020s family economics has raced to the bottom: wages have stagnated, the cost of goods and services is set based on a household where everyone is in full time employment, and latch-key kids now have He-Man in the palm of their hands courtesy of Apple, Google, Samsung, and Xiomai.

This situation is ripe for exploitation by anyone who can offer parents a solution to their kids’ insatiable phone addiction.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#290

Post by ElProlactin »

CookieCrisp wrote: post #286
spawarotti wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am still curious: when is it acceptable to hope that something is actually going to work well enough when handed over to the government?

When the consequences of the government not abusing it isn’t devastating.

By that logic, countries like the US, UK, France, etc. shouldn't be allowed to have a standing military.
Post reply on HN