call and email your congresspeoples, and tell them not to go through with this
Then donate millions in campaign contributions to ensure they actually care at all what you think!
The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
41–50 of 598 posts
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're lobbying FOR it?! I thought this would hinder them along with everyone else
They lobby for because then they can collect biometrics from kids and then reject them. So they don't serve underage kids , no fines but they do get data.
> then they can collect biometrics from kids
They will collect it from everyone to prove your age.
The question only that is it worth the gamble by Meta, as in how many people would rather leave the sites (from Whatsapp to Insta to Facebook) than give them their ID
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#43Targeting the kids is so infuriatingly successful tactics. It gives the adults the option to be apathetic. In reality, anyone who is a kid now will never know any better. It just means we're the last generations that had the luxury of a world that remembered what privacy was.
EDIT: about half to two thirds of the responders didn't catch "I'm not a fan of these proposed solutions." I am not saying I like these solutions. I am trying to explain why they have support among the general public. Many of these responses are the usual "shoot the messenger" response you get online when you point out what the "other side" thinks and why they think it even if you don't necessarily agree . On this is…
This kind of restrictions expects account control to work. For example, parent's account & separate child account on a device. For the same reasons you describe, it will be ineffective: not tech-savvy. Children will use their parent's/grandma's account on TV and phone, one that has long been verified as "adult" despite the Youtube recommendations consisting of 6-13yo content.
If there were an organic push by parents, they would be happy to buy and promote products today, without waiting for legislation to catch up. Where are these local parental control products?
Speaking of social media and Youtubes of the world, why can't I, as account owner/parent, totally blacklist some "recommendations"?
Age verification is not a fit tool for content filtering. Users want the latter, but get switcheroo'd into the former.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#44I'll see your "government wants biometric surveillance" conspiracy theory and raise you a "pedofiles want to keep kids on social media" theory.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
EDIT: about half to two thirds of the responders didn't catch "I'm not a fan of these proposed solutions." I am not saying I like these solutions. I am trying to explain why they have support among the general public. Many of these responses are the usual "shoot the messenger" response you get online when you point out what the "other side" thinks and why they think it even if you don't necessarily agree . On this is…
You are missing half of the story. This is not “caring legislators punishing big bad tech”. This IS big bad tech. Meta has spent $2B lobbying for this. More than wanting to get kids addicted, Big Tech and the intelligence community wants perfect observability into online activities. This is a win/win for big tech. If they don’t get age verification, they can keep getting kids addicted to propaganda and consumerism. I…
big tech wants a safe harbor.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#46Just put the age verification in the browser already. Then introduce some new headers the browser sends to servers with some proof that the user was verified and the browser would need a response (like CORS) for it to work.
[deleted]
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
The GOP. This is part of Project 2025. They want to outlaw porn. > Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered. https://web.archive.org/web/20241103190346/https://static.pr...
Why not just outlaw sex? If looking at sex is illegal they might as well go all the way.
Because in their philosophy sex serves a purpose (procreation and the deepening of the marital union).
Anything that doesn’t support those two aims (contraception, abortion, gay marriage, pornography etc.) is therefore immoral but there’s nothing wrong with sex in its ‘proper’ context.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#48call and email your congresspeoples, and tell them not to go through with this
We do not need to lose our rights to privacy because people want to control what their kids do and see. (I'm not even convinced this is true - this is likely just a convenient lie told by the politicians, because I don't see parents clamoring for this.)
We're below replacement rate, so it's not like most people are even having kids, anyway. Yet we have to give up our freedom for other people to raise little Christian tots (or whatever the motivation for this is billed as)?
I grew up in a Deep South Protestant household. Having access to the unfiltered internet got me interested in STEM. Bumping into occasional shock sites and porn as a preteen did not turn me into a satanist cannibal.
Keeping "Kids Safe" is a LIE.
This is about putting collars on every US citizen.
They'll filter you into groups.
They'll control what loans and jobs you can get.
They'll use this information to blackmail you should you ever run for office or gain wealth or power.
This is a threat to democracy and personal liberty.
Child safety is a LIE.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm telling you why ordinary people support this, and I can tell you they overwhelmingly do... at least those with children. I'm also aware of what you're talking about. That's called regulatory capture. They know this kind of regulation is coming and want to make sure they're the ones writing it so they can use it to entrench their oligopolies. My point is that something like this will happen unless we find an alter…
There is no technological fix for the issue you raise. The issue being parents not wanting to bother raising their kids, and thus giving the state and corporations control over what they can and can’t do. That’s a cultural issue. No idea how to solve it.
It's largely a wealth inequality issue.
Rich parents can have nannies, expensive software, or a parent who stays home from work. Poorer parents do not have time or energy to police this stuff or supervise their kids. They're too busy putting food on the table and paying rent or a mortgage.
Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online
#50That sounds like a reasonable aim. Online services should be responsible for implementing age verification checks on content that children shouldn't be accessing, just like vendors of alcohol and nicotine products are responsible for age verification.
The EFF likes to frame everything that might even slightly rein in online service providers as being a terrible assault on online freedom and therefore, in their view, shouldn't be done. But I don't see them coming up with any better solutions. Just endless complaints, while soliciting donations to keep generating these endless complaints.