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

We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

federalregister.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 395 posts

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#171

Post by oaiey »

sschueller wrote: post #61
perihelions wrote: post #40

- "To Address the National Emergency" A fast-moving emergency that can't be fixed by normal constitutional lawmaking processes, and must resort, exceptionally, to executive-branch emergency decrees—for expedience. Nevermind the executive order it's drawing authority from was written three years ago. It was a fast-moving emergency then, too, I suppose. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01... (…

So national security trumps democracy and freedom? What do you have left to protect when you give it all up? Might as well just elect a king and be done with it.

You elect a executive branch to protect you. Sometimes that includes executive orders. And if these survive the check and balances, maybe it is for the greater good.

If you do not want that, the country has to work on a functional Parlament and switch away from a presidential system.

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#172

Post by sakjur »

smsm42 wrote: post #156
perihelions wrote: post #40

- "To Address the National Emergency" A fast-moving emergency that can't be fixed by normal constitutional lawmaking processes, and must resort, exceptionally, to executive-branch emergency decrees—for expedience. Nevermind the executive order it's drawing authority from was written three years ago. It was a fast-moving emergency then, too, I suppose. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01... (…

We're in a permanent emergency now. Which is no surprise - if a mere voluntary act of declaring emergency lets the government do what they otherwise can't - why not declare it over and over? Check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_i... In the US we have 42 (!) ongoing national emergencies. The oldest dating back to 1979. I think most of US-based HN readers never lived in non-emergen…

That’d be September 1978 – November 1979 and before then during the roaring twenties if I read this right.

Maybe POTUS should declare an emergency to reduce the number of emergencies?

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#173

Post by pessimizer »

LivenessModel wrote: post #151

Simple ID scans are already on their way out. "Liveness checks" where we have to turn on our webcam and let some stranger make a full biometric model of our head to use basic internet infrastructure is the dystopia we deserve, and it's the one we're gonna get. I hope the "AI" was worth it. Let's see if you can fix this problem you created.

Already happening at the IRS. There's a reason government was so reticent in regulating facial recognition in any meaningful way: The government database of everyone's faces, purchased and cobbled together from private partners, isn't complete enough yet.

This has nothing to do with AI, but an out-of-control executive branch and intelligence agencies. AI is just another tool that will make it cheaper.

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#175

Post by pavon »

kube-system wrote: post #159
dannyobrien wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you not add plugins to Wordpress?

You cannot install Debian or Windows 11 on Wordpress.

It applies to any "software that is not predefined". An OS is just an non-exhaustive example of one type of software that applies.

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#176

Post by oaiey »

smsm42 wrote: post #156
perihelions wrote: post #40

- "To Address the National Emergency" A fast-moving emergency that can't be fixed by normal constitutional lawmaking processes, and must resort, exceptionally, to executive-branch emergency decrees—for expedience. Nevermind the executive order it's drawing authority from was written three years ago. It was a fast-moving emergency then, too, I suppose. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01... (…

We're in a permanent emergency now. Which is no surprise - if a mere voluntary act of declaring emergency lets the government do what they otherwise can't - why not declare it over and over? Check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_i... In the US we have 42 (!) ongoing national emergencies. The oldest dating back to 1979. I think most of US-based HN readers never lived in non-emergen…

They are declared in an emergency (most of them are sanctions to freeze money and freedoms of foreigners). That does not mean you live in an emergency. That they are still active means only that the Parlament was too lazy or too blocked to put them in a law.

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#177

Post by dsign »

Raidion wrote: post #134
chlodwig wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skimming the regulations, this does not seem right. All IAAS providers (which is everyone who allows customers to run custom code, so it includes any web host like Dreamhost) to verify the identity of foreigners who open an account. This would seemingly entail the service provider needing to verify everyone's identity, in order to figure out who is a foreigner and who is not. In other words, if you want to run your o…

Aren't you basically revealing yourself anyway because you need to pay them?

AWS has my name and my credit card number. But they have never asked for a photocopy of my passport, my history of international travel, which nationalities I have and so on. Something tells me that for the goal of this law to be achieved, all those details would need to enter the database.

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#178

Post by [deleted] »

EGreg wrote: post #109
lolinder wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In practice, as long as a definition can conceivably cover something, the DOJ or some agency will use it. Case in point from yesterday: money transmitter as applied to arresting the developers of a NON-CUSTODIAL wallet, as part of a wider war on crypto mixing: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2024/04/24/samourai-wallet-f... This comes amid a war on end-to-end encryption, and so on. It's not like they are going to stop…

[deleted]

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#179

Post by loeg »

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #20

This is about foreign customers only, so as an attempt to abolish the constitution, it is severely flawed in respecting it enough to keep its distance. I can't think of any US service I am using that doesn't already require KYC? None of the large providers will let you get far without a credit card, as far as I remember? Since the discussion here will consider itself mostly with upright revolutionaries being disenfra…

Providing a credit card is a far cry from KYC. But it also highlights that we probably don't need IAAS businesses to implement KYC as long as the payment providers already do.

Re: We have 4 days to contest KYC being required by internet services

#180

Post by monksy »

kube-system wrote: post #142
monksy wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mind expanding on what "non-documentary methods" means?

It is all defined in TFA: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/01/29/2024-01... The TL;DR is that it can be whatever the provider wants, as long as it: * includes name, address, email, phone number, IP address, and payment information, * is written down, * gives them a "reasonable belief that it knows the true identity of each customer" * and "a sound basis to verify the true identity of their customer and…

> * gives them a "reasonable belief that it knows the true identity of each customer"

> * and "a sound basis to verify the true identity of their customer and beneficial owners and reflect reasonable due diligence efforts".

I'm reading in to that in a conservative manner where it's "internally justified" that going the full privacy abusive route is justified. "Reasonable due diligence" is respective to the organization that could be punished, not a public sense.

Given that it's on the company's discretion of diligent checks, I can completely see that their more aggressive requirements of: "your biometrics, copies of your official documents, 20 years of criminal background checks, a polygraph, approval by the Democratic National Party for appropriate speech, history of pornography consumption" being the standard.

We're not getting a solution from the government that's a secure "is this person a US citizen?"/"Valid for IaaS service?" data point. The business is receiving all of the data to ask that question and are not trustable entities.

Post reply on HN