The current generation is already heavily manipulated by it, which means the next generation - their children - will also be heavily manipulated by it regardless of consumption or lack thereof.
Mindless parents -> mindless children.
Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
631–640 of 720 posts
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#632Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think the NSA would balk at that challenge?
It doesn't have to be based on crypto designed by NSA, does it?
Design is far from the only threat vector. Any implementation that is less than perfect is prone to all kinds of attacks. A few years ago, there was a report that the NSA could decrypt a double-digit percentage of encrypted web traffic thanks to a larger-than-expected bag of factored primes they keep handy.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#633I might be the only one here in favor of this, and wanting to see a federal rollout. It is not reasonable to expect parents to spontaneously agree on a strategy for keeping kids off social media- and that kind of coordination is what it would take, because the kids + social media companies have more than enough time to coordinate workarounds. Have the law put the social media companies on the parents side, or these k…
But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet (and probably unconstitutional under the First Amendment, to boot.) It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff, but that any of these laws will either be (a) unenforceable and useless, or (b) draconian and…
> It's the same problem with requiring age verification for porn. It's not that anyone wants kids to have easy access to this stuff,
Depends on the argument being made, on the ideology of the audience, on the current norms, etc.
I had an exchange here on HN some time back (topic was about schools removing certain books from their libraries), and very many people in support of those books, which dealt with gender-identity and sexual orientation, also supported outright porn (the example I used was pornhub) for kids of all ages as long as those books with pictures (not photos) of male-male sexual intercourse could stay in the library.
Right now, if you made the argument "There are some things kids below $AGE shouldn't be exposed to", you'll still get some (vocal) minority disagreeing because:
1. They feel that what $AGE kids get exposed to should be out of the parent's hands ("Should we allow parents to hide evolution from their children?", "Should we allow parents to hide transgenderism from their children?")
2. They know that, especially with young children, they will lose their chance to imprint a norm on the child if they are prevented from distributing specific material to young children.
In the case of sex and sexual education, there is currently a huge push for specific thoughts to be normalised, and unfortunately if it means that graphic sexual depictions are made to children, so be it.
The majority is rarely so vocal about things they consider "common sense", like no access to pornhub for 10 year olds.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#634Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But the only way to do this is to require ID checks, effectively regulating and destroying the anonymous nature of the internet That seems intuitive, but it's not actually true. I suggest looking up zero-knowledge proofs. Using modern cryptography, it is easy to send a machine-generated proof to your social media provider that your government-provided ID says your age is ≥ 16, without revealing anything else about…
A super interesting example of this is the proof-of-passport project. https://github.com/zk-passport/proof-of-passport Today you can scan your passport with your phone, and get enough digitally signed material chained up to nation level passport authorities to prove anything derived from the information on your passport. You could prove to an arbitrary verifier that you have a US passport, that your first name starts…
The selective disclosure is super cool, I wonder how it works since smthing like a hash of DG1 is what is actually signed, how can you selectively disclose verified data from "inside" the hashed area? It does not sound very feasible to me but I am not an expert in zk-snarks etc.
There are some wrinkles that prevent passport data being used more broadly - technically it is a TOS violation to verify passports / use the ICAO pkd without explicit permission from ICAO or by direct agreement with the passport holder's CSCA (country signing certificate authority). Some CSCAs allow open use but many do not.
Also, without being too pedantic about it, what you are able to prove is more like possession of a document. An rfid passport (or rfid dump & mrz) - or in fact any kind of identity document - does not prove that you are the subject - you need some kind of biometric bind for that.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#635Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not community, though. You're not inhabiting the same space, share the same problems and try to work them out them together. You're not helping each other out if someone falls into trouble.
It's up to you what you build that way. You can build a real community, you can build a shallow friend group, the medium doesn't have to limit it. My boss met his wife in a MUD.
You can meet your wife on a Tinder, via ads posted in newspaper or on a cruise. It does not mean that those are communities.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#636Earlier quoted context omitted.
The algorithm powering the trending section, which rewards angry replies and accusatory quote-tweets is at least a good a candidate as a source of harm to political discourse than anonymity.
Take it a step forward, ban Engagement based algorithmic feeds. I've said this and I'll continue to say this type of behavioral science was designed at FB by a small group of people and needs to be outlawed. It never should have been allowed to take over the new age monetization economy. There's so much human potential with the internet and its absolutely trainwrecked atm b.c of Facebook.
I agree.
It's been deliberately designed to cause strife. They are genuinely anti-human companies that seem to want conflict and tension to occur.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/30/facebo...
This article was very on-the-nose, that really should have been the writing on the wall.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#637Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are interacting through online games quite often though. You can't throw them all in one basket. You can make friends / longer term connections that way (I did) or keep in touch with people you don't live near to.
That's not community, though. You're not inhabiting the same space, share the same problems and try to work them out them together. You're not helping each other out if someone falls into trouble.
You can do all of those things sans inhabit the same space with people you meet online. I met my 2 girlfriends online and we support each other through everything even though we aren't in the same place most of the time. I'm part of a niche group on reddit that supports each other emotionally in a way I've struggled to find in physical spaces. I still meet up with people in physical space, but I absolutely get meaningful social connection from online spaces.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#638Earlier quoted context omitted.
And now the state of Florida has a receipt of every website you ever visit. That will surely never be an issue when the Governor's private law enforcement arm looks through it or the inevitable data leak happens.
The intention of the API is for that to not be possible. > The privacy of this API relies on that fact: the issuer is unable to correlate its issuances on one site with redemptions on another site. If the issuer gives out N tokens each to M users, and later receives up to N*M requests for redemption on various sites, the issuer can't correlate those redemption requests to any user identity (unless M = 1). It learns o…
Someone has to hand the browser the token. And that token has to validated by someone's backend. You now have an issuer with knowledge of who a token belongs to and a visited with a record of where they were. They go over this on that very page:
> (unless M = 1)...
> If the server uses different values for their private keys for different clients, they can de-anonymize clients at redemption time and break the unlinkability property...
> If the issuer is able to use network-level fingerprinting or other side-channels to associate a browser at redemption time with the same browser at token issuance time, privacy is lost.
This is why Mozilla rejects the proposal. We just have to trust issuers to be good and then trust that neither issuers nor websites will "accidentally" log these tokens where a data leak creates a papertrail to real-world identities.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#639Earlier quoted context omitted.
The intention of the API is for that to not be possible. > The privacy of this API relies on that fact: the issuer is unable to correlate its issuances on one site with redemptions on another site. If the issuer gives out N tokens each to M users, and later receives up to N*M requests for redemption on various sites, the issuer can't correlate those redemption requests to any user identity (unless M = 1). It learns o…
would this mean if the issuer experiences an outage you'd be unable to access sites?
Yes. Also if you run out of issued tokens.
Re: Florida House of Representatives approves bill to ban social media for kids < 16
#640Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMHO the general idea isn't terrible the implementation is, suppar. But hy that's why it's good that's it's not yet US wide as it means there is time to make improvements. - I'm not the biggest fan of hard cutoff - addictive dark patterns which cause compulsive use should be general banned or age restricted no matter where they are used, honestly just ban most dark patterns they are intentional always malicious consu…
>addictive dark patterns which cause compulsive use should be general banned or age restricted no matter where they are used, honestly just ban most dark patterns they are intentional always malicious consumer deception not that far away from outright committing fraud. How would you write a law that accomplishes your goal?
The usage with of user interface design patterns which take advantage of [..] to cause compulsive use is not allowed. In context of this law user interface refers to the mechanism of a user interacting with a software, this includes any kind of user interface no matter weather which medium it uses for presenting information and allowing interactions and no matter which form it is presented at in the software.
Where [..] is a rough definition of dark patterns which there exist multiple of in CS and which you can base on factors like 1) deceptiveness, 2) intend to manipulate the users behavior, 3) how it interact with various human feedback systems etc.
The thing about law people on HN often tend to forget or complain about is that they intentionally do not need to be perfect precise scientific definitions, predicate logic, or anything like that. This means you can reasonable describe them by likely effect and weather it seems reasonable that the effect could have been intended (without bothering to actually determine intend) without needing to go into _any_ technical details outside of clearing that indeed any form of user interface is covered.