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

Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 50 posts

Re: Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

#11

Post by thefurdrake »

ke88y wrote: post #7
thefurdrake wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, it sounds great when it's phrased that way. What happens when an American-operated chat platform that provides E2EE claims they can't stop kids from seeing illegal content because of E2EE? All this legislation restricting free flow of information being pushed because "Think Of The Children" is concerning.

I encourage you to read the proposed statute. It's not very long. KOSA requires that social media companies cannot target children with certain types of ads or provide algorithmic recommendations, when they "reasonably know" that the user is a minor. A company implementing E2EE can simply make the choice to either not serve minors or to not provide certain features (algorithmic content targeting, targeted ads) to use…

I should set aside some time to look deeper, yeah.

But:

I fundamentally agree with the concept of restricting children from accessing social media up to a certain age. Shit's radioactive.

Making the choice to not serve minors won't stop minors from lying about their age (no new age verification is required?), and it won't stop subpoenas from piling up from individual cases involving children when that company providing E2EE is compelled to provide data it specifically designed its platform not to be able to provide.

It just worries me.

Re: Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

#13

Post by ke88y »

thefurdrake wrote: post #11
ke88y wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I encourage you to read the proposed statute. It's not very long. KOSA requires that social media companies cannot target children with certain types of ads or provide algorithmic recommendations, when they "reasonably know" that the user is a minor. A company implementing E2EE can simply make the choice to either not serve minors or to not provide certain features (algorithmic content targeting, targeted ads) to use…

I should set aside some time to look deeper, yeah. But: I fundamentally agree with the concept of restricting children from accessing social media up to a certain age. Shit's radioactive. Making the choice to not serve minors won't stop minors from lying about their age (no new age verification is required?), and it won't stop subpoenas from piling up from individual cases involving children when that company providi…

> Making the choice to not serve minors won't stop minors from lying about their age

This is true. But I believe anonymous speech is important, and once you require age verification you necessarily sacrifice anonymity.

> and it won't stop subpoenas from piling up from individual cases involving children when that company providing E2EE is compelled to provide data it specifically designed its platform not to be able to provide.

There are certainly easier ways for law enforcement to do dragnet surveillance. Also, KOSA does not introduce criminal penalties.

Re: Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

#14

Post by thefurdrake »

ke88y wrote: post #13
thefurdrake wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should set aside some time to look deeper, yeah. But: I fundamentally agree with the concept of restricting children from accessing social media up to a certain age. Shit's radioactive. Making the choice to not serve minors won't stop minors from lying about their age (no new age verification is required?), and it won't stop subpoenas from piling up from individual cases involving children when that company providi…

> Making the choice to not serve minors won't stop minors from lying about their age This is true. But I believe anonymous speech is important, and once you require age verification you necessarily sacrifice anonymity. > and it won't stop subpoenas from piling up from individual cases involving children when that company providing E2EE is compelled to provide data it specifically designed its platform not to be able…

> But I believe anonymous speech is important, and once you require age verification you necessarily sacrifice anonymity.

I agree with you here. It's not a problem that I think can be solved through legislation.

American law enforcement has proven that it'll collect data in a multitude of ways when needed contextually. They shouldn't be handed additional tools to do so. And I'm not talking about dragnet surveillance, I'm talking about the law creating tons of instances of E2EE getting in the way of "justice", which seems to be an increasingly-common problem, and that in turn being used to rationalize making E2EE illegal like it is in some other places already.

Re: Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

#15

Post by ke88y »

RoseRose wrote: post #10
ke88y wrote: post #3

I am a huge fan of the Kids Online Safety Act, and if you aren't employed by Meta then you should be to. Social media algorithmic recommendations and "addictive product features" have to be turned off BY DEFAULT. Social media companies are responsible for not showing content to minors that promotes suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, sexual exploitation, tobacco, or alcohol. I think Internet Age Verification…

> addictive product features What does this mean? All computer interaction is potentially addictive.

True.

The text is "patterns of use that indicate or encourage addiction-like behaviors".

It's broad but careful wording. The FTC and courts will have to decide the exact meaning. I think "encourage" is clear enough and pretty obviously something we should regulate, since it signals intent. The implication of the word "indicate" is more ambiguous.

Re: Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

#16

Post by averysmallbird »

ke88y wrote: post #3

I am a huge fan of the Kids Online Safety Act, and if you aren't employed by Meta then you should be to. Social media algorithmic recommendations and "addictive product features" have to be turned off BY DEFAULT. Social media companies are responsible for not showing content to minors that promotes suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, sexual exploitation, tobacco, or alcohol. I think Internet Age Verification…

I am the staffer who cowrote this bill and I appreciate your comment and understanding of it.

Re: Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

#17

Post by ke88y »

thefurdrake wrote: post #14
ke88y wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Making the choice to not serve minors won't stop minors from lying about their age This is true. But I believe anonymous speech is important, and once you require age verification you necessarily sacrifice anonymity. > and it won't stop subpoenas from piling up from individual cases involving children when that company providing E2EE is compelled to provide data it specifically designed its platform not to be able…

> But I believe anonymous speech is important, and once you require age verification you necessarily sacrifice anonymity. I agree with you here. It's not a problem that I think can be solved through legislation. American law enforcement has proven that it'll collect data in a multitude of ways when needed contextually. They shouldn't be handed additional tools to do so. And I'm not talking about dragnet surveillance,…

I agree with your concerns. I'm just a techie with no legal background, but as far as I understand it, KOSA enforcement would be done by the FTC and state AGs via civil suits against companies. It's not a criminal matter, so law enforcement agencies wouldn't be involved, except in the normal ways law enforcement can become involved in civil cases.

Re: Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

#18

Post by [deleted] »

averysmallbird wrote: post #16
ke88y wrote: post #3

I am a huge fan of the Kids Online Safety Act, and if you aren't employed by Meta then you should be to. Social media algorithmic recommendations and "addictive product features" have to be turned off BY DEFAULT. Social media companies are responsible for not showing content to minors that promotes suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, sexual exploitation, tobacco, or alcohol. I think Internet Age Verification…

I am the staffer who cowrote this bill and I appreciate your comment and understanding of it.

[deleted]

Re: Senate panel advances bills to childproof the internet

#19

Post by ke88y »

averysmallbird wrote: post #16
ke88y wrote: post #3

I am a huge fan of the Kids Online Safety Act, and if you aren't employed by Meta then you should be to. Social media algorithmic recommendations and "addictive product features" have to be turned off BY DEFAULT. Social media companies are responsible for not showing content to minors that promotes suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, sexual exploitation, tobacco, or alcohol. I think Internet Age Verification…

I am the staffer who cowrote this bill and I appreciate your comment and understanding of it.

Thanks. I'd appreciate your thoughts on sverona's comment if you're able to share. (Not the particular scenario, but the general concern that KOSA could be weaponized by anti-LGBTQ AGs.)
Post reply on HN