Live data from Hacker News

Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

github.com

31–40 of 1001 posts

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#31
How much do you want to bet that Amutable, via its founder's control of the systemd codebase and ability to drive change, will be first-in-line to force a switch to its variant of systemd, along with a module for age verification?

I don't see it as coincidence that with all these laws passing, suddenly he announces a secure, "controlled", "locked down" version of systemd. Why, RedHat and Ubuntu can simply drop in this new variant, pay a small fee, and be done with compliance.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#32
post #30
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The critical thing is not so much "Americans" as "big money". Big Russian money is also a threat. Big Chinese money .. well, there's a bit of that about, but it doesn't seem to have shown up at the legislation influencing layer.

Oh, that's a different topic: as someone from and living in eastern Europe, there's not a single doubt in my mind that the biggest threat to any civilization is russia by a long shot. The alarming part is that the current US administration hasn't got a single clue of history, suffers from chronic incompetence and the whole superiority complex and fanboying russia as a consequence - those pose a threat. In the context…

> the biggest threat to any civilization is russia

Surely you meant this as hyperbole, right? If not, I would love your reasoning as to why its a bigger threat than literally anything and anyone else.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am from EU, and contrary to age verification laws in general. My stance is that if somebody is a minor, his/her/their parents/tutors/legal guardian are responsible for what they can/cannot do online, and that the mechanism to enforce that is parental control on devices. Having said that, open-source zero-knowledge proofs are infinitely less evil (I refuse to say "better") than commercial cloud-based age monitoring…

Yes! This is the way, give parents the ABILITY to advertise the users age to browsers, apps and everything in between. Only target cooperations, do not target open source projects. Fine websites for not using this API (ex: porn sites). Assume an adult if not present.

This is a great solution to the stated problem. The issue is that nobody is actually trying to solve the stated problem. This is a terrible solution to the real 'problem' which is the lack of surveillance power and information control.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#34
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could make the same case for parental control as evil. "You‘re reading about evolution! Not in my house"

Parents already have a lot of control on children' education. Examples: most children believe in the same religion as their parents, and can visit friends and places only if/when allowed by their parents. This is simply extending the same level of control to the internet. Government-mandated restrictions are completely another level.

Who controls your age if you try to buy alcohol.

Who controls your age if you want to see an R-rated movie?

This is simply extending the same level of control to the internet.

More control for parents is a completely different level.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#35
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am from EU, and contrary to age verification laws in general. My stance is that if somebody is a minor, his/her/their parents/tutors/legal guardian are responsible for what they can/cannot do online, and that the mechanism to enforce that is parental control on devices. Having said that, open-source zero-knowledge proofs are infinitely less evil (I refuse to say "better") than commercial cloud-based age monitoring…

> My stance is that if somebody is a minor, his/her/their parents/tutors/legal guardian are responsible for what they can/cannot do online As a parent, sure, that is my stance as well. What... what other stances are there even? How would they work?

The steelman argument is that parents are not necessarily up to date on the technology, and cannot reasonably be expected to supervise teenagers 24/7 up to the age of 18. Compare movie ratings or alcohol laws, for example: there's a non-parental obligation on third parties not to provide alcohol to children or let them in to R18 showings.

But the implementation matters, and almost all of these bills internationally are being done in bad faith by coordinated big-money groups against technologically illiterate and reactionary populist governments.

(if we really want to get into an argument, there's what the UK calls "Gillick competence": the ability of children to seek medical treatment without the knowledge and against the will of their parents)

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#36

Compare this to what the EU built. The EU Digital Identity Wallet under eIDAS 2.0 is open-source, self-hostable, and uses zero-knowledge proofs. You can prove you're over 18 without revealing your birth date, your name, or anything else. No per-check fees, no proprietary SDKs, no data going to a vendor's cloud. The EU's Digital Services Act puts age verification obligations on Very Large Online Platforms (45M+ monthl…

Isn't eIDAS the same technology stack that would put the government in total control of what websites you can view & what ones you can't? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_website_authenticati...

QWACs exist to provide a more stringent and user-accessible way to assert a website's identity, mostly to foil phishing and other exploits that regular certificate systems don't address well. Where does this cross into censorship at all?

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#37
post #35
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My stance is that if somebody is a minor, his/her/their parents/tutors/legal guardian are responsible for what they can/cannot do online As a parent, sure, that is my stance as well. What... what other stances are there even? How would they work?

The steelman argument is that parents are not necessarily up to date on the technology, and cannot reasonably be expected to supervise teenagers 24/7 up to the age of 18. Compare movie ratings or alcohol laws, for example: there's a non-parental obligation on third parties not to provide alcohol to children or let them in to R18 showings. But the implementation matters, and almost all of these bills internationally a…

That steelman still stands on a core assumption that its both the state's responsibility and right to step in and parent on everyone's behalf.

Maybe a majority of people today agree with that, but I know I don't and I never hear that assumption debated directly.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't eIDAS the same technology stack that would put the government in total control of what websites you can view & what ones you can't? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_website_authenticati...

QWACs exist to provide a more stringent and user-accessible way to assert a website's identity, mostly to foil phishing and other exploits that regular certificate systems don't address well. Where does this cross into censorship at all?

When the government decides not to issue certificates to websites they don't like.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#39
post #2

I am now waiting for Gruber (daringfireball.net) to post another rant about how terrible EU regulation is. Zero-knowledge proofs are the way to go for this type of thing, I find it mind-boggling that the US lets itself be bamboozled into complete lack of privacy.

it's not about protecting children. that's only the PR.

once you get this you stop asking why the tech details are the way they are.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#40
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parents already have a lot of control on children' education. Examples: most children believe in the same religion as their parents, and can visit friends and places only if/when allowed by their parents. This is simply extending the same level of control to the internet. Government-mandated restrictions are completely another level.

Who controls your age if you try to buy alcohol. Who controls your age if you want to see an R-rated movie? This is simply extending the same level of control to the internet. More control for parents is a completely different level.

Disingenuous, but I'm sure you know that and were being intentionally so. The government is not using alcohol age laws as a justification to place a camera in your bedroom to make sure you aren't sneaking booze, but it is using internet age laws as a justification to surveil your entire life in a world which is becoming increasingly digital-mandatory to participate in government services or the economy. Nobody had a problem with internet age laws when "are you over 13? yes/no" was legally sufficient.
Post reply on HN