Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every time age verification comes up, it’s shocking how many comments here start proposing schemes where we use government-issued tokens combined with secure device attestation to solve the problem. Some people get so focused on providing a technical solution to the problem of age verification without revealing your full ID to the website that they forget that they’re proposing we start requiring only government-appr…
Through the lens of information warfare, it's hard not to view those comments as an astroturfing campaign from the exact organizations who would want device attestation
Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
551–560 of 663 posts
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#552Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you acknowledge that for many people and practically e2ee and crime are connected? e2ee is a very useful tool for crime and combined with crypto useful tool for monetizing crime. Criminals used to speak in code, meet clandestine, use burner phones and websites were easy to shut down. Now they don't need to. The solution to privacy problem is not to shout while closing your ears but to make it clear that you see th…
Ordinary people tend to care about privacy from government intrusion when you talk to them about it, and e2ee is so prevalent for lots of everyday communication that it isn't something they think about. Discord recently introduced e2ee for voice chat. Apple has iMessage and Facetime. Whatsapp and to a lesser extent Signal are massively popular. If you asked and ordinary person "Should the government be able to retroa…
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#553Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have one. Called the internet.
It is not censorship resistant without using the domains of some foreign nations.
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#554Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you been to a city council meeting lately ? Ever? I'm trying to push for surveillance regulation where I live. I'm there monthly. Calling your representative is the best way to realise that they don't give a fuck. Yesterday I was editing a clip of one of them lying overtly. It will be a minor inconveniences. what we call democracy is a dog and ponies show. So maybe cryptography is not that ridiculous, after all
Not every lawmaker is the same and there's more than one way to get a lawmaker's attention. Get more people with you. Or convince a group that's previously established trust in your jurisdiction to join you in speaking out. Or find out what causes the policymakers do care about and think of a compelling way to frame arguments against age verification in those terms. Heck - if you can get a local government agency to…
Despite this, and despite the fact that all of your communications are monitored, you manage to get a crowd of people to a meeting - where you are allowed to "comment" (i.e. speak, while nobody is obliged to listen to you or react), your crowd makes a lot of joyful noise which is never broadcast on television news, and is deleted within minutes from Tiktok, Facebook, and Youtube for vague policy violations (your third appeal on youtube is accepted, and the video returns to the web a month and a half after it was filmed.)
This protest really energizes you all until the vote, when the bill you were protesting passes unanimously. Afterwards, three out of the nine people on the committee lose their seats (the other six weren't up for election that year.) One of them gets a new appointment to a more-powerful higher-paying government job; the second joins a venerable contractor that immediately starts lobbying the state for the contract; and the third, a moron, didn't realize the others were being controlled and ends up assistant manager at a local car dealership. Everything is forgotten by the next election cycle, especially because all of the leaders who showed up at meetings and wrote their representatives were smeared in the media as bad parents with questionable tattoos, and eventually moved away due to loss of employment, housing, and shortly later banking and insurance coverage.
There's a real childishness in these 50s-propaganda style views of civics. The only way something gets accomplished like that is if there is no money against it, and your "activism" makes the politician thinks that there might ultimately be money (or money-equivalent) in taking your side.
But e.g. $10M is pocket lint to people and organizations pushing this stuff. They can go around like fairies changing everyone's lives who are willing to sell out, and politicians are already pre-configured for that. They've been dreaming all their lives of selling out. Your angry letters to the manager notwithstanding.
The reasons these are eventually getting passed have nothing to do with people not speaking up or not getting their lawmaker's attention. They have to do with power, who has it, and who doesn't. It's not about whose the most virtuous and persuasive. The case for age verification is not persuasive, to anyone, and barely makes an attempt to be - they just go immediately into calling people alt-left Chinese pedophile terrorists. It's not because they're dumb.
> There's more to politics than just going to town hall meetings or sending emails or making phone calls!
Going to town hall meetings, sending emails, and making phone calls is already an enormous amount of work. It is also simply advisory to lawmakers who are not obliged to listen to you or care; trying to get daddy to understand is a good tactic only because daddy loves you.
What real politics consists of is threats. You can't threaten somebody who has backing from somebody with a hundred million dollars and an opportunity for more if they get a few votes to go the right way. Even a well-framed argument is a tool to make people who ignore it feel threatened by people who are convinced by it. Where is the threat?
There's no political way to stop this. I absolutely believe that the only reason they move even this slowly is because powerful people feel like they could be in personal physical danger if they were near the center of particular decisions or particular acts based on those decisions. It's a waiting and boiling game, where the media and government messaging gradually change public perceptions and attitudes until doing things like age gating the entire internet seem safe to do.
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#555Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#556Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like the California law where the device owner sets the parental controls and apps have to obey them or get fined.
This is the best solution I've seen, and it's also the simplest. No authority is involved other than the parent. No complicated protocols, or heavy CS theory about privacy preserving algorithms. Just one setting, "this device belongs to a minor" and apps either honor it or they are not allowed in the App store. Will some parents turn it off for their 14 year old? Yes, but some parents buy beer for their 14 year olds.…
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#557Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're in Europe, you can sue them under GDPR? They won't obey - HN explicitly chooses to disobey European laws - but having an arrest warrant out might be inconvenient enough for them to do it anyway.
That would likely result for just adding the geofencing so that EU countries can’t access directly.
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#558Earlier quoted context omitted.
The science for age bans on social media is weak at best. There were pretty much terrible studies done during Covid and did not attribute all sorts of uncertainty going on at the same time. If the point were to improve on the mental health of kids there are countless underfunded public programs. Especially in the US, social support programs like food, healthcare basic and mental, actual physical public spaces for kid…
For what it’s worth, as an Australian, and as the operator of an online community, I unreservedly approve of the social media ban enforced by our government. Conversely, I don’t agree with the way some other countries are going about it. Especially the UK with the abysmal way they have physically policed online speech by adults. Incredibly sad to see police prioritise non-violent “speech crimes” because they’re too s…
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#559Earlier quoted context omitted.
That might be an argument if it wasn’t already happening. US social media platforms already kowtow to domestic and foreign policy and you need look no further than the suppression by Google and Meta of content about Palestine. What’s fascinating to me of that there are people who win vehemently oppose age verification yet have no absolutely no problem with anti-BDS laws, Gaza suppression, etc. Or worse, they’ll suppo…
> suppression by Google and Meta of content about Palestine That is nonsense. This type of content appears on my TikTok/Reels feeds nonstop even if I don't interact with it.
More evidence: leaked audio from ADL Chief Jonathon Greenblatt saying "we have a Tiktok problem" [5]. Kinda weird that within a few months later Biden signed a hastily passed law to force a sale of Tiktok. Weird.
Need more? Twitch updated it's Hateful Conduct Policy to say "Zionist" is "hate speech" [6]. This is for a political designation not a religious or ethnic one as evidenced by the fact that Christian Zionists outnumber Jewish Zionists in the US by about 30 to 1 [7].
[1]: https://theconversation.com/social-media-platforms-are-compl...
[2]: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/metas-israel-policy-chi...
[3]: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/20/meta-systemic-censorship...
[4]: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/hrw-inve...
[5]: https://x.com/snarwani/status/1725138601996853424
[6]: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/twitch-changes-hateful-content-...
Re: Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech
#560Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at how the American hate jury lottery, I doubt this would be welcomed in the state. It may work in some other country..
> It may work in some other country.. Jury service in the UK is generally seen in a positive light ( despite having far too much hanging around ). I suspect the US problems could be easily fixed by forcing employers to pay you while you are doing it.