91–100 of 395 posts
So this is just to make it easier to ban non-US citizens from using US IaaS (or track them). Just don't use American IaaS in the first place. It's not like computers are available only in the US.
Skimming through the article, it seems like the extent of this is to require IAAS (Infrastructure) providers to verify the identity of those who are using their services to train AI. It's an attempt to stymie sanctioned or malicious actors, from training AI and especially from hopping between services or using aliases to continue training on their model. It seems a bit benign and I don't understand the parallels othe…
This seems, to me, an utterly malignant attack on anonymity, which is a protected constitutional right. It's the idea that every internet packet needs to be tied back to some verified identity. We're in frog-boiling territory with this garbage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Legally speaking, internet service providers are infrastructure providers.
Do you have a basis for this claim or are you just throwing it out there to see if it catches on? The document linked refers to IaaS, which as an acronym definitely does not include ISPs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah this is a very industry standard term in banking and anyone in that industry is going to immediately know what you are talking about, but outside of that industry, chances are high that a layman will not
In the past that would be true. But given most blockchain platforms require it, I imagine it is more widely known in the tech-savy hn-like realms? Then again I worked on blockchain tech around half a decade ago, so I might be knowledge biased here?
For those who didn't know, KYC stands for "know your customer". It's a good idea to spell out abbreviations the first time they're used, especially since the abbreviation itself is not used in the linked article. It's also worth noting that the proposal is about US infrastructure as a service (IaaS) products specifically, not "internet services" in general.
Submission Statement: We have exactly 4 days to leave comments to the Federal Government of the United States of America contesting the requirement of KYC by internet service providers. This law is not conducive to a free internet/society.
I ask this 100% genuinely, since this isn't a subject I've ever given any mind to. Why should we oppose this? What are the potential negative outcomes if this goes through? Can you steelman the argument for why people support this, and explain why you find the arguments unconvincing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm going to need another intelligence to read the full text. "U.S. IaaS providers and foreign resellers of U.S. IaaS products must exercise reasonable due diligence to ascertain the true identity of any customer or beneficial owner of an Account who claims to be a U.S. person." So at a minimum, everyone's identity is verified by IaaS provider. If you claim to be a non-U.S. person, additional information is collected…
Dreamhost, Wordpress, etc
This effort will end anonymity on the internet. For everyone.
Crypto was just the beginning. Next is end-to-end encryption. And it's going on worldwide, not just in USA:
https://community.qbix.com/t/the-coming-war-on-end-to-end-en...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> propose regulations requiring U.S. Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) providers of IaaS products to verify the identity of their foreign customers, Sounds like solid policy to me.
And how do you know that one customer is a foreign one and one is not?
The TL;DR is that the must collect name, address, email, phone number, IP address, and payment information and use that information for "verifying the identity of each foreign customer to the extent it enables the U.S. IaaS provider or foreign reseller of U.S. IaaS products to form a reasonable belief that it knows the true identity of each customer."
AWS already has all of this information on my account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is great that you ask a question, because we live in a world with the freedom to opine on things. What could be considered a massive issue to me may not be a massive issue to another; and if we feel the world will be better by debating our positions, we have the right to do so. Today, anonymity and pseudonymity exist and allow people to speak freely without risk of backlash for having a different opinion as often…
This doesn't seem to affect users of internet services, though. It's just IaaS, so things like AWS. With that limited scope, what is the adverse affect of KYC laws on freedom of speech?