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

Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

ilga.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 473 posts

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#111

Post by tokai »

ActorNightly wrote: post #83
spullara wrote: post #2

this is completely insane. we need some kind of constitutional amendment to get rid of all this kind legislation forever.

I actually see the golden lining here >"Operating system provider" means a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. I.e Linux will most likely to be immune, since its not tied to a particular computer. Which just means Linux stay winning. It already made big headway in the video game space, so its p…

All the distros are the providers here. The Linux kernel is not an operating system.

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#112

Post by jeffbee »

jacobgkau wrote: post #18
mikestorrent wrote: post #3

I don't like this whole thing, but compared to what I was fearing would happen, this idea is nowhere near as bad. What I expected was that we'd end up with the OS vendors actually being mandated to really do age verification, and then submitting that using Web Credentials and Secure Attestation so that the far end could trust the whole thing, locking open-source OS's out of the mix and creating more of a walled garde…

Yeah, the laws in CA, CO, and now IL are essentially just mandating generally available OS's implement a standardized, local parental control system. Detractors will say parents should just install existing parental control software, even though it's existed in its current form for decades and is obviously not effective. And they'll say it should be the parents' responsibility to enforce what their kids are doing wit…

The argument about the California bill is not that it is a slippery slope, but that it was drafted by people with zero domain knowledge. It applies equally to toaster ovens as well as iPhones.

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#113

Post by gruez »

hypeatei wrote: post #99
gruez wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why does it matter specifically that Meta is doing it? This has long been a goal for intelligence apparatus and big tech: get rid of anonymity online to "fight terrorism" and sell ads respectively. How does getting the OS to do age verification "get rid of anonymity online" or help "sell ads"? Assuming the verification is implemented in a competent way (ie. it's not just providing an id scan for any app to read), it…

You've accepted the overton window shift that age verification is an inevitability and that we need to give up information to the operating system because any other way would violate our privacy! It's naive to see this internationally coordinated effort to "save the children" as anything other than the temperature in the pot being turned up. > implemented in a competent way (ie. it's not just providing an id scan for…

>You've accepted the overton window shift that age verification is an inevitability and that we need to give up information to the operating system because any other way would violate your privacy! It's naive to see this internationally coordinated effort to "save the children" as anything other than the temperature in the pot being turned up.

If you're trying to imply Meta is behind the "overton window shift", that's plainly not the case. The popular sentiment that smartphones and social networks are harming kids (thereby necessitating bans/verification) has been boiling over for a while now (eg. "The Anxious Generation, 2024", and the recent social media bans in Australia), and meta is just trying to get ahead of this with laws that favor them.

>What if there are vulnerabilities? You're inherently introducing more attack surface and providing more data than you would without these laws.

Probably less likely to cause vulnerabilities than web usb or web bluetooth , both of which gets some pushback here but nowhere as much an API that returns a number.

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#115

Post by mattnewton »

naikrovek wrote: post #104
JCattheATM wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the start of a very slippery slope.

Slippery slopes are a logical fallacy. Every single decision moving you down the slope is intentional. No sliding occurs if nothing actively pushes things down the slide. Accordingly, it is never too late to lobby against these things.

Like gravity, there is some inexorably force drawing the state towards mass surveillance tools as it makes the job easier. Removing friction that fights against that force is real

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#116

Post by areoform »

naikrovek wrote: post #104
JCattheATM wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the start of a very slippery slope.

Slippery slopes are a logical fallacy. Every single decision moving you down the slope is intentional. No sliding occurs if nothing actively pushes things down the slide. Accordingly, it is never too late to lobby against these things.

Not if you're being pushed down the slope.

It's not an accident that this appeared within a month or two of the California one. I would bet good money that there's someone shopping this bill around.

If you do a frequency analysis of when these bills are being introduced, you'll notice an odd cluster internationally. Less charitably, they're coordinating / talking / being pushed by someone. More charitably, the "idea" is spreading.

It's a very odd idea to spread though. Age "verification" isn't something people are truly passionate about.

I suspect that, long-term, this is about surveillance. The powers that be would rather kill the golden genie that's general purpose compute than have teens and radical youth with compute.

This is going to get bad.

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#117

Post by karmakaze »

ActorNightly wrote: post #83
spullara wrote: post #2

this is completely insane. we need some kind of constitutional amendment to get rid of all this kind legislation forever.

I actually see the golden lining here >"Operating system provider" means a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. I.e Linux will most likely to be immune, since its not tied to a particular computer. Which just means Linux stay winning. It already made big headway in the video game space, so its p…

Wouldn't that include using it on any cloud service that let's you pick it?

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#118

Post by nlitened »

naikrovek wrote: post #104
JCattheATM wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the start of a very slippery slope.

Slippery slopes are a logical fallacy. Every single decision moving you down the slope is intentional. No sliding occurs if nothing actively pushes things down the slide. Accordingly, it is never too late to lobby against these things.

> Slippery slopes are a logical fallacy

How is this a counter-argument? I often read this, as if there's some international trusted organization of logical thinkers that has approved inclusion of slippery slope to a list of logical fallacies that must never be invoked in a conversation.

Every single time five years later it turns out that the slope actually was slippery.

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#119

Post by inkysigma »

bink wrote: post #103
inkysigma wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except none of these bills (California or the one in question) as currently written require an ID to actually be verified, merely that the user provide an age. This seems intentional as it's seems to solve the user journey where a parent is able to set a reasonable default by simply setting up an associated account age at account creation. It's effectively just standardizing parental controls. I think this is a reaso…

Kids aren't stupid. They'll just create another account when they're old enough to figure it out. They'll tell their friends how to do it and the rest of us will be stuck with these stupid prompts forever like it's a cookie banner.

Actually given boot chain protection, this will probably get harder as time goes on but even assuming some kids are able to, this is clearly definable as a user error: the fault lies with the kid and as a parent you need to think about your threat model.

Right now, it's not even clear how to create parental controls at a reasonable level so there's no clear path for what to do or how to respond.

Re: Illinois Introducing Operating System Account Age Bill

#120

Post by jmye »

ActorNightly wrote: post #83
spullara wrote: post #2

this is completely insane. we need some kind of constitutional amendment to get rid of all this kind legislation forever.

I actually see the golden lining here >"Operating system provider" means a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. I.e Linux will most likely to be immune, since its not tied to a particular computer. Which just means Linux stay winning. It already made big headway in the video game space, so its p…

> since its not tied to a particular computer.

That's a really weird and nonsensical reading of "operating system software on a computer".

Post reply on HN