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

The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 598 posts

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#141

Post by bluefirebrand »

microgpt wrote: post #81
throw0101d wrote: post #68

We're approaching forty years of this: > The term was coined by Timothy C. May in 1988. May referred to "child pornographers, terrorists, drug dealers, etc.".[1] May used the phrase to express disdain for what he perceived as "think of the children" argumentation by government officials and others seeking to justify limiting the civilian use of cryptography tools. > The phrase is a play on Four Horsemen of the Apocal…

sometimes it's true. We ruined the brains of a whole generation of people. Should we stop doing that? If so, how?

Can you elaborate on what you think ruined the brains of a generation of young people? Actually, can you even tell us which generation you're referring to so we know what era of the internet you're unhappy with?

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#142

Post by verisimi »

noosphr wrote: post #108
none2585 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then donate millions in campaign contributions to ensure they actually care at all what you think!

Money is a poor substitute for people who care. The only people who think otherwise are terminally online losers who have never organized anything larger than a birthday party.

Are you talking from experience? What legislation have you organised?

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#143

Post by ethbr1 »

iamnothere wrote: post #132
andai wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it interesting how they're doing it in every anglo country simultaneously? How does that work?

At global conferences like Davos, where national leaders and policy makers go to schmooze and exchange ideas, this idea has been discussed for years. I’m sure there has been some subsequent cross-border coordination and discussion. For instance: https://idtechwire.com/spains-pm-proposes-mandatory-digital-... https://www.weforum.org/publications/reimagining-digital-id/ https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/01/davos-age…

> [World leaders] see cyberspace as a threat to top-down technocratic control and view Internet-enabled populism (aka democracy) as something to be quashed.

This has been true ever since the creation of the internet and web.

It's what the original 90s crypto wars were about: the right of individuals to access strong encryption to preserve the privacy of their communications from the government.

Absent that, pandora's box opens.

Age KYC is just the next fight against encryption and privacy dressed up in "for the children" clothes.

Strong encryption always has (and always will) facilitate criminal and illegal activity. Tough tits.

Law enforcement and intelligence agencies should work within the bounds of individual rights, not adjust them for convenience.

If the price of individual freedom^ is that it's harder to track and prosecute child exploitation, drug distribution, and mass terror attacks, then that's the way it needs to be.

^ "Individual freedom" as distinct from corporate freedom. Fuck non-human legal entities' rights to access encryption, aside from on behalf of their users.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#144

Post by ethbr1 »

shevy-java wrote: post #79
andai wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it interesting how they're doing it in every anglo country simultaneously? How does that work?

Because it is an organized attack. The lobbyists got their orders, now they pull it through. It is kind of fascinating to see though - I bet many people don't realise this coordinated attack. To me it is blatantly easy to notice. I am glad to not be the only one here.

One cannot use a handwavey "organized" and "coordinated" without a subject. Who specifically do you propose is ordering this?

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#145

Post by ethbr1 »

microgpt wrote: post #85
echelon wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

When did you grow up? The internet in 2006 and 2026 were nothing alike.

The internet in 1986 and 1996 was nothing like 2006.

2006 is on the other side of the event horizon of "Don't be evil."

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#146

Post by elric »

microgpt wrote: post #87
EGreg wrote: post #62

Oh for goodness’ sake, can’t the government (federal or states) create a service that will simply give out a token when someone has passed the age they want (eg 18), and provably goes through a multipart mixer, or just give you a zero-knowledge proof on the device of your choice, anytime you need? On a related note, if they will require a specific kind of ID to vote, can’t they just make sure everyone can receive tha…

It can't, because the government doesn't know shit about technology. Someone who knows tech, is close to the government, and isn't corrupt, would have to propose it and explain what this zorro-proof knowy doohicky is. The government knows ID checks because you get checked at bars.

Never been ID checked at a bar in my life. The whole concept is alien to me.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#147

Post by verisimi »

lebuffon wrote: post #130

I like to look back in history for parallels. In 1912 the USA required that all radio transmitters be licensed. There were classifications established for commercial and amateur stations. So at that time Feds understood the power of giving citizens the ability to communicate with the masses. Fast forward to the 1990s and politicians were clueless about what the internet was doing or would do in future. So what is the…

> It's going to be interesting watching nation states fight over how best to do this

As others have said, there is a coordinated push to drive this legislation everywhere. There is no fight in nation states. Just capitulation.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#148

Post by verisimi »

20after4 wrote: post #128
echelon wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the first step, the next is to require of this of everyone else. This is the threat day one. They get both groups' information. Next, they'll start to purge information they don't like because it has been corralled off from the rest of the internet. If they get lucky to trap a politician or billionaire in their net (and they will), they'll use that information to control how they vote or fund interests. Nex…

We're already living in 1984.

We were already living in 1984 when Orwell/Blair wrote the book.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#149

Post by roryirvine »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #60
api wrote: post #19

Earlier 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…

The truth hurts and you're getting downvoted for it. The public at large have real issues with the current state of the internet and people here don't want to hear it or address it so we get this.

Exactly. People are genuinely angry that the social media giants seem to have known for years that their products are harmful.

And, more so, that they've had a decade to reduce or mitigate the harms but have consistently (some might think deliberately) failed to do so.

So now we have the sledgehammer of legislation being wielded to do the job instead.

It's not an ideal outcome by any means, but what did people think was going to happen?

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#150

Post by hoppp »

throw9398449 wrote: post #39
hoppp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just outlaw sex? If looking at sex is illegal they might as well go all the way.

[flagged]

What you mean no way to consent? We can talk or use non-verbal communication.

Marriage is by itself not consent for sex and you can't sue somebody to get them to have sex with you either

Post reply on HN