91–100 of 458 posts
There is no way to do E2EE on a traditional social media platform with user-generated content and comply with existing US law. You can’t moderate an E2EE platform.
All of Meta’s major properties (Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp) support E2EE messaging.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Age verification should be banned Why? > They already got so much data on their users There are a variety of ways (see "Verifiable Credentials") that ages can be verified without handing over any data other than "Is old enough" to social media services.
Age verification obliviates anonymity on the internet. If everything you do, _can_ be tracked by the government, it _will_ be. Allowing for more effective propaganda, electrol control, and lights a fire on the concept of a government _representing_ anyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But what responsibilities do megacorps have? Right now, everyone seems to avoid this question Clear, simple, direct: Whatever was required of The Bell Telephone Company and nothing more.
So there should be a human operator manually gatekeeping every individual request to connect with another endpoint? It's a good thing those human operators couldn't listen in to whichever conversation they wanted.
(Reconsider my post. I'm arguing for no regulation.)
Reminder, Larry “citizens shouldn’t get any privacy” Ellison now owns tik tok. If you’re still using it or have friends and family using it you should stop immediately. It WILL eventually be used against you if this regime gets its way. https://digitaldemocracynow.org/2025/03/22/the-troubling-imp...
As if. If people haven't stopped using TikTok with all of the other reasons for stopping, then because Ellison is damn sure not going to move the needle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Age verification should be banned Why? > They already got so much data on their users There are a variety of ways (see "Verifiable Credentials") that ages can be verified without handing over any data other than "Is old enough" to social media services.
It's a slippery slope. This is the next two steps into 1984. Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs. (Wait, we already do that, right?)
Is it? I thought that was a logical fallacy?
> This is the next two steps into 1984.
How so?
> Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. > The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs.
Could you provide some more details on why you think this? For a start I talked about a scheme in which you don't hand over ID.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Age verification should be banned Why? > They already got so much data on their users There are a variety of ways (see "Verifiable Credentials") that ages can be verified without handing over any data other than "Is old enough" to social media services.
Age verification obliviates anonymity on the internet. If everything you do, _can_ be tracked by the government, it _will_ be. Allowing for more effective propaganda, electrol control, and lights a fire on the concept of a government _representing_ anyone.
How so?
Please explain in detail, because there are already schemes such as "verifiable credentials" which allow people to prove they are of age without handing over ID to online services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Children are just too effect of a tool when building a surveillance state. We should have banned children from owning open computers a long time ago just like we do with Alcohol, Driving licenses, etc. Instead children would own special devices that are locked down and tagged with a "underage" flag when interacting with online services, while adults could continue as normal. We already heavily restrict the freedom of…
> Instead children would own special devices that are locked down and tagged with a "underage" flag when interacting with online services, while adults could continue as normal. California is mandating OSes provide ages to app stores, and HN lost their mind because it's a ban on Linux.
They forgot to put in the provision which exempts apps which do not need an age rating? As in: everything os related.
Sounds like a good way to get rid of snap at least since that is where all the commercial bloat is located. Last time I did a fresh Debian install I do not remember installing any app from the os repository which would require age restrictions (afaik).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Monitoring children's DMs is the responsibility of the parents, not megacorps Absolutely. But what responsibilities do megacorps have? Right now, everyone seems to avoid this question, and make do with megacorps not being responsible. This means: "we'll allow megacorps to be as they are and not take any responsibilities for the effects they cause to society". Instead of them taking responsibilities, we're collectin…
> But what responsibilities do megacorps have? Right now, everyone seems to avoid this question Clear, simple, direct: Whatever was required of The Bell Telephone Company and nothing more.
The apples to oranges in this comparison is probably top five on HN ever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Children are just too effect of a tool when building a surveillance state. We should have banned children from owning open computers a long time ago just like we do with Alcohol, Driving licenses, etc. Instead children would own special devices that are locked down and tagged with a "underage" flag when interacting with online services, while adults could continue as normal. We already heavily restrict the freedom of…
Would be a nightmare to implement and achieve the goal, but I have to say I think it’s more right than wrong. All of the data is very clear about the harms. China has restrictions for social media and screen time for kids — how do they implement this?