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

Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

nonogra.ph

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 663 posts

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#161

Post by febusravenga »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #119

If I say something illegal during a meeting, people will notice it and will report it to the police. Then I may get arrested or fined. Why should it be different on the internet ? Provided we live in countries where freedom of speech is enacted. Of course in Russia or china it's different but surely they already have tools like that.

Its not about saying illegal things. It's mostly about saying things that can get you canceled in future in future culture.

Dark jokes and strong opinions are example - you something filthy - let's say dark Holocaust/Nazi joke but funny in situation In group that accept it and it's ok. But if it's recorded, it'll stay forever and will surface in most unexpected moment, like job interview or some other screening by gov/corpos.

Don't say that dirty jokes should be punished in future if in given situation they were received as ok and only later someone else, not in situation is going to judge it

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#162

Post by HerbManic »

microgpt wrote: post #61
iamflimflam1 wrote: post #38

This is already happening if you want to visit the US. Customs officers will look at your social media accounts to make sure you are compliant.

And if you say you don't have any, they'll assume you're lying and deny you.

I have wondered that. I have this one and a very VERY bland Facebook that I post something stupid on every 12 months or so. So in a strange way I have accidentally shielded myself.

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#163

Post by matheusmoreira »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #119

If I say something illegal during a meeting, people will notice it and will report it to the police. Then I may get arrested or fined. Why should it be different on the internet ? Provided we live in countries where freedom of speech is enacted. Of course in Russia or china it's different but surely they already have tools like that.

> If I say something illegal

A situation that should be impossible due to freedom of speech.

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#165

Post by yamillove »

stavros wrote: post #122
jrflowers wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That page says most kids can barely read. Are you a kid?

> Across student groups, average fourth-grade reading scores in 2022 were lower for the following student groups: > [..] > male and female students; So reading scores were lower for everyone? Why single out groups?

[dead]

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#166

Post by friendzis »

roenxi wrote: post #29
onion2k wrote: post #10

If we taught systems thinking in schools things like internet age verification would never get past being an idea on the back of a napkin. People struggle to consider the second-, third-, and nth-order effects of anything so asking them to consider what else might happen if we bring in laws and technical mechanisms to 'protect the children' is unfortunately too a big leap for a lot of them. Most people are bad at spo…

In fairness, the evidence is that people already pretty firmly against things like chat control and the will to push it through tends to come from the political circles more than popular belief it is a good idea. I expect that if the measure itself went to a general vote, the majority would be against it once they have to deal with a specific proposal. It takes repeated pushes by the authoritarians looking for an opp…

When you think about it, the idea of a representative democracy is rooted in the technical difficulties of implementing a direct democracy: both spread of information/discussion to the masses and organizing the votes.

In this day and age, probably with a relatively tiny investment into public access points, we could very reasonably have a technically functional direct democracy. The legislative cycle is already authenticated so there's no need to solve "authenticated anonymous vote" problem, European countries already have functional eIDAS systems to back the authentication part and the legislative systems are already to some degree digitized.

On one hand, the problem "what if someone sells their vote" is already present and unsolved, in the shape of lobbying. What's interesting, though, that we have built entire systems to shape public opinion and entrenched them into our daily lives, which are used by corporations and politicians alike.

This begs a question: is there such a thing as unbiased public opinion without authenticated internet access?

inb4: direct democracy does not mean parliamentary systems could be abolished altogether, central spaces for debate would still help solve discussion exchange problems

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#167

Post by bluegatty »

Telaneo wrote: post #147
bluegatty wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your local library has age and ID requirements. Your local 'town square' has 'some rules'. Parents are entirely able to overcome any of this if they so choose - including feeding their kids alcohol, guns etc. - and so the freedom does materially exist. Social Media isn't a place for free expression - it's mostly toxic - like exposing your children to the most vile, inauthentic people. The more genteel places, frankly…

> Your local library has age and ID requirements. It literally doesn't (at least not if I don't intend to borrow a book and take it home; if I stay there and read, I can do so without any ID. I only need ID to get a library card, and I don't need that to enter and read a book).

It literally does - and you just admitted it.

The point is that 'even the local library' enacts rules and social conventions - not that they're exhaustively and acutely enforced in all corners.

No 4chan section in the library?

You might wonder why it doesn't have vast array of avant guard adult content, porn or art with really aggressive themes and people calling each other the n-word?

In society we have 'age related' conventions all over the place ... including your Library.

This is the absolute worst of HN, where people dissolve into Reddit-like discussions of bad meatphors and totally out of context hair splitting.

I just can't believe anyone here has any relationship with the reality of children, teaching or parenting whatsoever. It's the same argument made by the 'drugs should be legal and accessible' crowd - completely oblivious to the instantaneous massive health epidemic we'd have with opioids and fentanyl, or the 'anti vaxer' crowd - narrow ideological arguments about expression disconnected from any kind of reality or nuance.

There's a variation of social media that will be fine for the kids, they can be exposed to more into their late teens. Parents that want to opt out, will de facto be allowed to - and there is always a slippery slope with every law.

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#168

Post by rdiddly »

onion2k wrote: post #10

If we taught systems thinking in schools things like internet age verification would never get past being an idea on the back of a napkin. People struggle to consider the second-, third-, and nth-order effects of anything so asking them to consider what else might happen if we bring in laws and technical mechanisms to 'protect the children' is unfortunately too a big leap for a lot of them. Most people are bad at spo…

Journalists are supposed to be helping the people by doing it.

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#169

Post by applfanboysbgon »

stymaar wrote: post #157
MaKey wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This assumes good faith, which doesn't match reality. It's about control, not protecting children. Also age verification is still a problem in itself. Given your idea of a physical card, kids will find a way to use the card of their parents. Even if the card couldn't be misused by others - you give platforms the knowledge of whom is a minor, which means they can be targeted better.

> This assumes good faith, which doesn't match reality. It's about control, not protecting children. “ Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. ” > Given your idea of a physical card, kids will find a way to use the card of their parents. Sure there are kids who have access to their parents credit card with the PIN, but how frequent is that? In every system, fraud will exist, but tha…

> “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

This is not an argument, it's just a stupid quip. And I would sooner suggest that you "never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by malice". Humans are overwhelmingly selfish and more than willing to harm others to serve themselves.

Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

#170

Post by m0unta1ntube »

microgpt wrote: post #77
wuyuan wrote: post #7

You're right. Many countries use the protection of minors as an excuse, but in reality, they just want to strengthen the regulation of speech.

We should actually protect minors, then they won't be able to use it as an excuse. Right now it works as an excuse because minors are being harmed by the unrestricted internet, mostly by social media.

They will always bring up a fringe matter to prove that statement wrong, no matter how much you will protect minors, someone else will still harm them and that is enough to justify these actions
Post reply on HN