61–70 of 175 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He says clicking "accept" to tracking cookies and their 762 "partners"
Not surpised supporters of the regime don't know about tracking protection. It's always the tech illiterates cheering on the surveillance.
The whole idea of this is broken, since so much of our collective knowledge is locked away in YouTube/Reddit. It's making a law against children in libraries because there are adult books in it.
There is some okay stuff on YouTube. There is nothing stopping people reposting stuff on platforms without social media elements and with proper curation and publisher responsibilities. Most big YouTubers would love this to happen I’m sure.
Big, popular channels do push their viewers to alternative platforms like Patreon because of Youtube's censorship guidelines and arbitrary demonetization, but a lot of valuable content is on smaller channels where the owners may not have the wherewithal to transfer all of their content, much less their audience.
Am I right in thinking that the EFF doesn't launch any legal campaigns inside the UK (but they offer support to those who do) Is there a UK version of the EFF that fights in the courts against this lunacy or does it not quite work the same in the UK as it does in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>We have parental controls on devices That's irrelevant because social media regulation is a collective action problem. No individual parent can restrict their kids access to social media without ostracizing it, it only makes sense if all parents together get their kids off these platforms.
>it only makes sense if all parents together get their kids off these platforms Yes, and the wishes of all parents together != the wishes of the UK government which has its own agenda at play in which to weaponize this public outrage for their own benefit(mass surveillance and mass censorship). The UK government doesn't actually want what's best for all the children of all the parents, otherwise it wouldn't have allo…
This legislation has widespread support among British parents across the political spectrum[1]
"As YouGov has shown previously, such a policy would be widely popular with the general public. In our latest survey, looking more specifically at the views of parents, we find that 77% of those with children under the age of 18 would support a ban, compared to only 14% who are opposed.[...] Likewise, 76% of parents think the government needs to kick up their activity on this issue, although a much lower rate of 43% think they need to be doing “much more”."
I don't even have any idea what the last paragraph, other than being some generic twitter rant has to do with the topic of the thread
[1]https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/54969-eight-in-ten-parents...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they'll find a way to verify age by themselves. Yeah, by outsourcing it to some shady company that sells all your private info to the lowest bidder. See Discord for example.
Don't use the site then? Or sites can compete on which age verifies in the least shitty way? I think we have been stuck in this way of life so long we can't imagine an alternative.
What you’re saying is functionally equivalent to “just deal with it,” since ultimately people will choose to have their privacy violated over the lifelong Sisyphean task of trying to avoid all of that. That doesn’t mean people don’t care about privacy, it’s just the current equilibrium in our broken system.
> I think we have been stuck in this way of life so long we can't imagine an alternative.
I agree.
About 2 million adults in the UK don't have government-issued photo ID. Certainly many 16-17 year olds will have trouble verifying their age. They're blocking huge sectors of the UK population from being able to use the internet normally.
Nobody needs to use social media though. Really they should just torch the lot.
The EFF is very wrong on this one. Some things are bad and we should keep children away from them.
Is "social media" the internet
Does "social media", i.e., "Big Tech", preserve privacy or eviscerate it. "Internet privacy" is been in direct conflict with their "business model". They engage in sweeping data collection and mass surveillance of internet users to support invasive "personalised" ad services
It seems like most people engaging in "free speech" on "social media" are not anonymous, not really interested in "privacy"
In many cases, they "share" their every thought
40 ways to share information over the internet without age verification
This is old and could be updated with more