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

Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

legiscan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 84 posts

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#31

Post by ethin »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #13
fc417fc802 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the one hand, I'm absolutely against blanket age verification laws like this one, think there are better ways to solve the stated problem, and believe that the current crop of legislation is being pushed by bad actors for nefarious purposes by means of pandering to public mania. On the other hand, I do appreciate that a possible unintended consequence of the out provided by (5)(b)(I) could be that PII (along with…

> there are better ways to solve the stated problem Call your representatives. There is overwhelming demand for age gating social media (based on, honestly, good evidence). This will be implemented based on who calls in. If the status quo of technical people being hopelessly nihilistic continues, it will be written in the stupidest ways possible.

No, the mania is based on extremely bad/cherry picked evidence. There are at least 6 studies alone (some including meta-analysis) which has found absolutely no link to prove social media is addictive or harmful to children. If anything, they've found the opposite, and one even suggests that calling it addictive might be causing the very problem we're pretending to solve

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#32

Post by CamperBob2 »

declan_roberts wrote: post #30

This TOTALLY ORGANIC movement to suddenly please think about the children with required age verification in software makes me sick. Whoever is behind this needs to be exposed, tarred, and feathered.

It's pretty well understood to be Meta, isn't it?

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#33

Post by ethin »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #24
MBCook wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course we could make predatory algorithms illegal. Or just algorithmic timelines/discovery algorithms. Nah. Can’t stop the money. Let make brain destroying scams and ad spam legal as long as you’re over 18.

TL;DR We need age verification laws to prevent minors from accessing the addictive stream of toxic sludge rather than outlawing its manufacture and distribution.

How exactly would you do this without, you know, violating the first amendment? Algorithmic feeds are nothing without the content. People get toxic sludge because they signal to the algorithm that they like that.

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#34

Post by jmward01 »

We have age verification for many things. The problem now is trust. There is, for obvious reasons, negative trust that this won't ultimately harm people. That it won't be used to harvest more data and invade our digital lives even more. That negative trust is there because we see a constant ability to gather even more information about us, and use it to produce real harm, but no hint at an entity actually fighting back to protect people. If anyone in any government is reading this, you do not gain my trust that big tech will not abuse my information by requiring big tech to collect more of my information, you just loose my trust in the government. Earn my trust back and then, maybe, in some distant future, we can talk about 'but who will think of the children' legislation like this.

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#35

Post by fc417fc802 »

ethin wrote: post #33
fc417fc802 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR We need age verification laws to prevent minors from accessing the addictive stream of toxic sludge rather than outlawing its manufacture and distribution.

How exactly would you do this without, you know, violating the first amendment? Algorithmic feeds are nothing without the content. People get toxic sludge because they signal to the algorithm that they like that.

Presumably by outlawing the types of algorithms used with the legislation carefully limited to a particular context rather than anything being authored by an individual. Right to express oneself preserved, government regulates a harmful product, business as usual.

As far as this specific Colorado legislation goes (which is concerned with the ability to comply with their previously passed data privacy law) I think it's not entirely bad but I have two issues with it.

First, it reverses the problem. Services should be sending an age-appropriateness (or even just general content classification) signal to the device for local processing, not the other way around. If you're going to mandate that OS creators do anything it should be to implement a certain baseline level of (interoperable!) functionality as far as parental controls are concerned.

Second, the entire thing should be predicated on some metric such as MAU or revenue or combination thereof not on the exceedingly vague idea of a "free, publicly available code repository".

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#36

Post by NotPractical »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #32
declan_roberts wrote: post #30

This TOTALLY ORGANIC movement to suddenly please think about the children with required age verification in software makes me sick. Whoever is behind this needs to be exposed, tarred, and feathered.

It's pretty well understood to be Meta, isn't it?

Does anyone have a citation for this that wasn't written by Claude? It wouldn't surprise me, but I refuse to look through AI slop to check the accuracy of the report.

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#37

Post by ethin »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #35
ethin wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly would you do this without, you know, violating the first amendment? Algorithmic feeds are nothing without the content. People get toxic sludge because they signal to the algorithm that they like that.

Presumably by outlawing the types of algorithms used with the legislation carefully limited to a particular context rather than anything being authored by an individual. Right to express oneself preserved, government regulates a harmful product, business as usual. As far as this specific Colorado legislation goes (which is concerned with the ability to comply with their previously passed data privacy law) I think it'…

I definitely agree with those. Age verification laws in general I have lots of beef with because they're so nonsensical.

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#38

Post by Cider9986 »

NotPractical wrote: post #36
CamperBob2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty well understood to be Meta, isn't it?

Does anyone have a citation for this that wasn't written by Claude? It wouldn't surprise me, but I refuse to look through AI slop to check the accuracy of the report.

It was written by Claude, the question is if it's accurate.

Re: Colorado Amended SB051 (Age Verification Bill) to Exclude Open Source Projects

#39

Post by Cider9986 »

Call it an Identity Verification Bill, or think of something even more negative. That is more accurate and doesn't sound as attractive.

Names matter. We saw ChatControl 1.0 get defeated, it probably didn't hurt that the name implied censorship.

Post reply on HN