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

261–270 of 663 posts

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

#261

Post by Aeolun »

5693802 wrote: post #144
onion2k wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, this is going to be a rant. :) Admittedly it's a long time since I was in school, but when I was there the notion of teaching the benefits of physical activity was limited to being told to run about for some 'sport', and absolutely nothing about why that's a good idea. Everyone was expected to do the same thing with no consideration for ability, disability, or motivation. Kids were punished with detentions for…

I'd add that not only were we not taught about health benefits in PE classes, the punishment for non-participation was not only detention but also potentially failing the entire grade. I ended up dropping out in my first year of high school due to a culmination of similar issues. I loved and still love learning, but my school was not an environment for learning. It was an environment for teaching rigid obedience to a…

That must be a joke right?

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

#262

Post by nephihaha »

oarsinsync wrote: post #223
po1nt wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best level of democracy is no democracy. The problem of voting for road repairs is a problem we created by democracy. We voted ourselves into a system we can't escape, just because people back in the days couldn't fully comprehend side effects of their collective decisions. Very few people realize that there is option to not use government cohersion as a solution to everything. I know this is unpopular opinion. T…

> No one cares about UK having a king, because it doesn't change a thing. Which is the position the Monarchy absolutely wants you to have, and they definitely don't want you to know that they have veto power over all laws, and regularly intervene and get laws modified so that they're not included in scope. Meanwhile they just gave themselves a massive pay rise, at a time when government is cutting public spending in…

The BBC is monarchist to the core. A lot of people say the BBC is biased in one political direction or another, but they often forget about monarchism.

One notable example of their privilege was when Andrew George MP dared to ask a question in parliament about the Duchy of Cornwall, only to be told he wasn't allowed to. (The Duchy of Cornwall is a kind of slush fund for the heir to throne. Charles had it before he became king. It has tax breaks, and also the ability to seize property and mine on people's land.)

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

#263

Post by watwut »

pibaker wrote: post #152
watwut wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, social networks already made genocide happen. They they were instrumental in the curren winning march of fascism - in USA, in EU in Asia.

This is why China and Russia are shiny beacons of democracy and liberalism — they heavily regulate their social media! Seriously, do people not look at history or at least the world around them when they make such claims? Genocides have happened before we had internet, or TV, or radio, or any modern technology people attribute genocides to. Hatred and violence are parts of human nature and trying to blame it on techn…

My point is, the "what happens when federal agents kick down your front" thing is already happening and happened. And curiously, tech libertarians ranting about the freedom were facilitating every single step along the way, actively helping those every single step along the way.

> Genocides have happened before we had internet, or TV, or radio, or any modern technology people attribute genocides to.

Genocides became more frequent every since we have technology. Technology facilitates genocides. Both by creating actual means of killing (industrial killing in WWII) and by creating conditions for distribution of "work". Radio specifically was instrumental in Rwanda.

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

#264

Post by nly »

stymaar wrote: post #255
nly wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't matter! You still need to send a digital image from the id, signed by an authority, saying "this person is 18" You then still need a trusted ID service or algorithm to capture an image of the user _at the time of use_ to compare that to. Just having access to your digital ID credentials proves nothing The zero knowledge proof only helps prevent tracking between the ID service and the website you're logging in…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-knowledge_proof

Yeah...I'm fully aware what a ZKP is..you're just missing the point.

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

#265

Post by simoncion »

Nursie wrote: post #234
simoncion wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not everyone knows they exist... "Oddly", the laws that demand you enter your birthday (and will eventually demand you scan your ID) seem to require OS producers to make it so that users will not be ignorant of these new features. [0] I wonder if it's possible to do the same thing for Parental Controls...? > ...there's a huge install base of older and/or cheaper devices that may not be getting updates that could be…

> You use law and regulation? I mean, 'papers please' mechanisms are a type of law and regulation, we're arguing over what sort of law and regulation should be used, no? In Australia, platforms are being regulated, the regulation says they must not allow under 16s to have accounts. How they achieve this is up to them to a large extent. "Papers-please" then is their doing. It's certainly not the only way things can be…

> I mean, 'papers please' mechanisms are a type of law and regulation...

Yes, they are. I still have no idea how laws of the form "You must honor the signals you get from Beefed-Up Parental Controls and we fine or jail you if you do not" fails to constrain the behavior of US-based businesses. You seem to have an understanding of how it won't, so do let me know what I'm missing?

> An arms race to work around the controls,

Whether the arms race is server-side or client-side is irrelevant. If anything, I'd expect a client-side implementation to be far more robust... if for no other reason than because the private company that is contracted to implement and run a server-side implementation will cut every corner to improve their profit margins.

> In Australia...

Speaking from a civil-liberties perspective, Australia has been a shithole for a long time now. They can very safely be ignored by US parents and US lawmakers.

> "You're all evil and probably stupid".

The people who are pushing for these "Papers Please!" regs are evil. The lawmakers (and parents) who aren't asking "Wait, what about the existing Parental Controls mechanisms built into every major OS?" are stupid and -if that stupidity is willful- also evil. Those are plain facts. One is not obligated to be all niceys to people who are invested in tearing yet another chunk out of the vial organs of civic life.

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

#269

Post by fyredge »

stavros wrote: post #251
fyredge wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because the zeitgeist still changes regardless of enforcement. If all gay people were sentenced purely for their sexuality and nothing else, how long do you think it will take for ordinary folk to change their view? I reckon not long, unless the society is completely devoid of empathy and justice.

If you think that a society that actively harassed and persecuted homosexuals would spontaneously take pity on them, we have such different understandings on the world that debate can't be productive.

Then I'm disappointed that you would think that way. Change is the only constant, in people, in societies, in politics. Change can be spontaneous, but more of then than not, it is slow, gradual, boring, but still change nonetheless. Would you concede to that?

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

#270

Post by dguest »

coldtea wrote: post #256
dguest wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think everyone can agree that having O(100M) people vote on every local initiative is absurd. But a lot of countries are somewhere on the "direct" vs "representative" spectrum. The US actually abnormally lacking in direct mechanisms, for example. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums_by_country

> I think everyone can agree that having O(100M) people vote on every local initiative is absurd. I'm one of those everyones, and I don't agree. Except if you mean local initiatives that don't concern 100M people, but e.g. some regional municipality. Of course then just the locals can vote, be they 100K or 1M.

Yes! I meant local issues that don't concern 100M people. Local issues that concern a few thousand people can be (and often are) resolved by direct democracy.

I guess I could argue that putting a stop sign at a particular intersection in rural Kansas could concern me, even though I don't live in Kansas, but I think very few people would make that argument in good faith.

Post reply on HN