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

Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 485 posts

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#301

Post by CalRobert »

qball wrote: post #112
mjevans wrote: post #71

The Internet should be Unrated and thus Adults Only by default. Just like public spaces. (Would you allow an 8 year old to wander New York City unattended? Arguments can be made for more controlled spaces but...) Have a website and want the chance for kids to see it? Advertise in the headers that it's moderated and intended to be a given rating. Various indexers can pick that up. Complaints can be forward to relevant…

>Adults Only by default. Just like public spaces. This is the attitude that led us to this problem in the first place. >Would you allow an 8 year old to wander New York City unattended? They're at much higher risk of being arrested/abducted by the police than they are anything else. This is a uniquely North American neurosis; this happens every day in every other nation. They take the subway to work/school or walk, l…

The biggest risk is usually being killed by a driver

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#302

Post by roenxi »

ty6853 wrote: post #163
slg wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions and reason your response.

If it is at all helpful in interpreting the response, ~60% [0] of people aren't capable of doing that and will interpret you having feelings as equivalent to you accepting homophobic role models. Because they literally don't know how to construct their own values by independent reflection.

It was eye-opening to me discovering just how limited most humans are on that sort of basic empathy; I had no idea it was that big a blind spot. But it explains some of the weirder downvote storms.

[0] https://azatris.github.io/levels

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#303

Post by almosthere »

hot_gril wrote: post #208
throwaway81348 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

correct that's why everything in california, including the air in parking garages, is labeled with P65

I saw a P65 warning on a car.

It's literally on my truck - never bothered to remove the sticker.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#304

Post by HeatrayEnjoyer »

ty6853 wrote: post #235
slg wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Tolerance means little if it's about stuff that you have nothing but good or neutral opinions and feelings about. The virtue of tolerance is accepting that which gives you unpleasant opinions or feelings. This is the kind of tolerance that actually takes meaningful effort to develop. You're limiting tolerance to a form where it has little to no value.

[flagged]

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#305

Post by notTooFarGone »

nesk_ wrote: post #294
robto wrote: post #131

I wonder if there's any chance of technology like Verifiable Credentials[0] getting any adoption because of these laws. I think there are legitimate use cases where you would want to say, "hey, some third-party authority can vouch for me that ____", and not reveal to the third party who's asking for verification and not reveal to the party requiring verification any other claim besides the specific one that they need…

What's insane is that, in France, we have France Connect, which is exactly what you describe: a third-party authentication platform maintained by the government. Lately, a new law just passed to force porn websites to check the age of visitors. I would have been fine with an authentication going through France Connect: - the gov knows which website you went to, just like your DNS provider would, but it doesn't which…

It's mind boggling that governments don't offer that service for a lump sum per month

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#306

Post by awesomeMilou »

Aeolun wrote: post #255
wongarsu wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The kind of hierarchies we deem necessary are certainly different. In most of Europe (spoiler: overgeneralization incoming) nobody would have an issue with a child walking alone through a city, going into a bar and ordering a coke. Nobody is going to stop them from taking public transit to a book store, and nothing is legally or physically preventing them from looking at a couple pages in the latest playboy issue in…

> You will however be asked for ID before being allowed in a strip club, brothel or casino, or before being sold a DVD of some action movie. The action movie too? I’ve never seen that happen, and I’m certain I rented a whole bunch of age inappropriate DVD’s (or was it VCR’s?) back in the day. Maybe we were required to be ID’ed and the teenager behind the counter just gave zero fucks?

I've been ID'ed as a teenager when I was trying to buy Skyrim, which at the time was rated for audiences older than me. Gamestop and electronic retailers also generally didn't have teenage employees.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#307

Post by abenga »

darioush wrote: post #199
ndriscoll wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.lung.org/research/trends-in-lung-disease/tobacco... > Long term, smoking rates have fallen 73% among adults, from 42.6% in 1965 to 11.6% in 2022. > Long term, smoking rates have fallen 86% among youth, from 36.4% in 1997 to 3.8% in 2021. I'd say that's better off, not just in childhood but with long term effects.

And how can you attribute this decline to specific laws? Seems it could be a result of many things such as public education & cancer outcomes becoming obvious.

When people were told they could smoke from candy-flavored USB-charged devices they jumped back on the train. Education didn't do anything, and no facts are obvious in this new world.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#308

Post by johnisgood »

cyberax wrote: post #282
Aeolun wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guessing leaves me two options, so was you, or your children that were spit on? Also, what could possibly lead to that happening? Someone upset they were noisy? Or just that they dared show up at all?

Drugs and mentally ill people.

LA is full of those. Mostly junkies. My girlfriend often has such encounters when she takes the bus. It is awful. I am in Hungary and there is no such issues here. It is extremely safe in comparison. There was a stabbing (one in 30 years) and everyone rushed to help and to catch the perpetuator (who ended up stabbing himself anyways).

BTW I am a junkie myself, but I do not engage in such behaviors at all. And by "junkie" when referring to myself, I mean that I have an addictive personality, but I do take opiates ("only") for my mental and physical problems. I was never a safety hazard for anyone, including myself (there were times when I was, but had nothing to do with drugs). I do it at home (and before going out, too, due to its positive effects on my mobility and pain), and it makes me more emotionally stable. It sucks though, because when people think of opiates, what they picture is homeless people being unconscious on the streets with a needle coming out of their arm. No one could ever tell me that I was ever on opiates and this includes a lot of doctors. For one, it affects me differently (just like any other psychiatric medications and other drugs).

Anyways, yeah, junkies are an issue in LA and it pisses me off that my girlfriend has to always pay a lot of attention because one never knows what they might do. They are also loud, they create conflicts, and so forth.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#309

Post by nothrabannosir »

isaacremuant wrote: post #134
whatshisface wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a list of things that I wouldn't want the police to do, but should be done: - Kids should be in bed by 8. - They shouldn't light fires in the back yard. - They shouldn't run with knives. If someone tried to use my support for those things as a basis for 24/7 surveillance of bedrooms, back yards and knife drawers, they'd be insane.

Should be done? Lol. Talking about culture ethnocentrism taking to the extreme. No one forces you not to take your kid to bed at 8, or you for that matter. Stay out of my life. The anglosphere is so full of authoritarian people wanting to get into people's lives and even when arguing against surveillance you think there's an agreeable common goal we should all strive to. No. We don't.

That was his point.

Ironically enough I’ve found Americans to be by far the most resistant to authority, both societal and governmental. Maybe what’s shining through from your comment isn’t how you live in a less authoritarian environment, but that its mores just happen to align with yours so you’re blind to them.

Re: Age Verification Laws: A Backdoor to Surveillance

#310

Post by LoganDark »

haswell wrote: post #123
kennysoona wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Internet should be Unrated and thus Adults Only by default. As much as I kind of agree, I want to fight so much for open access to the internet because it was so useful to me as a child, thirsty for information and starving for nourishment. I will say I think these laws are bonkers. Restrict what companies can do with child data, make it clear an account is a minors, that should be more than sufficient.

> I want to fight so much for open access to the internet because it was so useful to me as a child As a child of the 80s who benefited greatly from the Internet as a kid (repressive religious parents, and the Internet was a lifeline), I feel extremely conflicted. On the one hand, I absolutely want to preserve the kind of benefit we received growing up. On the other, the Internet looks nothing like it did when I was…

> On the one hand, I absolutely want to preserve the kind of benefit we received growing up. On the other, the Internet looks nothing like it did when I was a kid.

This is how I feel, too. Nothing like TikTok or YouTube Shorts existed while I was growing up. I know how dangerous those are to me, I can't imagine how dangerous they could be to children. Mostly because anything I come up would probably be a wild overestimation, but I won't know by how much.

Rather than rotting my brain away with shorts as a child I spent my time trying to find every possible way to game every possible system. That was my idea of fun. Still is, though it's gotten harder and harder for me to find systems that are easy to game, because the types of systems you encounter as an adult tend to have already been gamed to death by everyone else.

Post reply on HN