Live data from Hacker News

Age verification is just a precursor to automated attribution of speech

nonogra.ph

611–620 of 663 posts

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

#611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Men were angels, no government would be necessary. Sadness is part of life. I actually respect the work you do, your own obvious condescension aside ("normies" and so forth). I guess we can allow it given this is probably a typical attitude of those who are deeply enmeshed in these issues while others just go on about their lives. I simply ask you to consider the counterfactual to your original articulation in thi…

Oh,there is a constitutional basis to what we're doing. The 4th amendment regulate searches and seizure. I would like the government bodies that have to follow the constitution to respect that. When Flock track movement at scale, when skydio film with uncanny accuracy, when Leonardo build a unique id from your devices. This is infringement. ( See : kyllo vs USA ) I'm playing by the rules of democracy here. And yet yo…

The only thing I am pushing back against is your exhortations to fatalism. Let's be clear about how you started this thread. Walking your critique back to something more reasonable is appreciated.

Best of luck in the councils to come.

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

#612

My theory is that age verification is just another way to push human verification. These large tech companies need a way to verify a user is a real person and not an AI bot. Both for displaying ads to real users and cutting down on spam. Nobody would support a "give away my anonymity online so I can be shown an ad for Coca Cola" bill. But it's easier to sell a law to boomers and lawmakers if you use the disguise of "…

many platform companies probably do not want to verify that a user is real, except in certain niche cases, as bots help them pump their numbers.

It might be a nice stock boost in the short term, but the goal for a majority of these companies is to sell ads. If advertisers see a drop in conversions, I doubt the platforms could keep the fake user ruse going for long.

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

#613

My theory is that age verification is just another way to push human verification. These large tech companies need a way to verify a user is a real person and not an AI bot. Both for displaying ads to real users and cutting down on spam. Nobody would support a "give away my anonymity online so I can be shown an ad for Coca Cola" bill. But it's easier to sell a law to boomers and lawmakers if you use the disguise of "…

The ad companies I think would want the opposite If they cannot distinguish real people from bots they can just charge more for more ads shown !

I imagine that the companies who purchase these ads will see a drop in conversions and start to ask questions.

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

#614

My theory is that age verification is just another way to push human verification. These large tech companies need a way to verify a user is a real person and not an AI bot. Both for displaying ads to real users and cutting down on spam. Nobody would support a "give away my anonymity online so I can be shown an ad for Coca Cola" bill. But it's easier to sell a law to boomers and lawmakers if you use the disguise of "…

Indeed a lot of social media platforms are used by foreign powers to create discord. Human psychology is much more attentive to negative messages and this is too easy to weaponize. A solution against that would probably be world changing. It would have to preserve anonymity still of course.

You are right that foreign powers abuse these platforms, but I don't personally believe that the platforms care. They just want to sell ads. Controversy will likely drive more traffic and more ad conversions.

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

#615

My theory is that age verification is just another way to push human verification. These large tech companies need a way to verify a user is a real person and not an AI bot. Both for displaying ads to real users and cutting down on spam. Nobody would support a "give away my anonymity online so I can be shown an ad for Coca Cola" bill. But it's easier to sell a law to boomers and lawmakers if you use the disguise of "…

That's why recaptcha is now doing human verification via mobile phone QR scan

I just heard about that. Won't work in the long term. Either the spammers will create a tool to bypass it, or they will continue to run services in third world countries where people complete captchas for pennies.

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

#616

I think you can look at all things pessimistically, like this article does but at the end of the day we all agree that there are things online we don't want our kids seeing or engaging with and it takes regulators to push how we protect them from those online places. What other options to regulators have? Age restriction has been around for longer than the internet itself, so its regulators applying that logic to the…

Why do you or anyone besides me (and my partner) get to decide what is ok for my kid to see? If you want your kids to not see porn on the internet, cool. Don't give them Internet access. You don't need to make the internet worse for me and my family to make that rule for your family. And maybe if you are parenting your child well, at some point you will be able to trust them to use the internet in a responsible way.

Regulators already decide certain content you can see through age rating restrictions (M15, R18+ etc) and has been the case for decades. Its just that no such ratings has been extended into online content, which is the issue.

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

#617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "If we taught systems thinking in schools" In the US, the public school system can barely teach basic reading and math. And the teachers don't appear to understand 2nd or 3rd order thinking themselves so therefore are unlikely to be able to teach it. Teaching systems thinking may be an effective solution but it needs an effective delivery system to test it.

Have you talked to any high school students or teachers lately? The ones I have (via my kids) are all articulate, thoughtful, and kind. It gives me a lot of hope for the future.

What's the average look like?

Are you speaking of Austin proper or Round Rock, West Lake, Cedar Park, or similar?

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

#618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I should have clarify, I'm part of a local group, itself part of a network of groups. We don't do politics, we do privacy and security advocacies. It means we work with DSA, MAGA, Libertarian. Allies that normie would known: ACLU, EFF. I talk with those folks weekly. (they talk a lot, themselve ) >There's more to politics than just going to town hall meetings or sending emails or making phone calls! I should have cla…

> I should have clarify, I'm part of a local group, itself part of a network of groups.

Which is great! Though my understanding is a big weakness of the ACLU/EFF/etc... crowd is that they typically pigeonhole themselves. The ACLU immolated its hard-earned partisan-but-principled reputation in the past decade and the EFF has a reputation of keeping non-lefty-libertarians at a very long arm's length away.

Beyond that - those groups tend to be sclerotic in their coalition membership. That inflexibility isn't always great!

Take the (largely) Progressive-funded Effective Altruist movement - in particular the Center for AI Safety. They are single-minded in their political goals, going so far as to enlist the help of Glenn Beck and Steve-Bannon-associate Joe Allen. They have spun off additional organizations to cater their pro-AI-regulation framing and messaging to different audiences: conservative and biblical messaging to evangelicals, fighting social media disinformation and fascism to progressives, and a hefty dose of civic grassroots rhetoric for their social media presence.

They have goals and are willing to make unsavory temporary alliances if it means enacting regulation.

I do not see such an appetite to influence politics from most of internet civil liberties organizations.

> I should have clarify sorry: I live in the US. That seems unlikely, to say the least.

And? Corporate lobbyists do this lobbying-by-proxy crap with decent regularity. Heck - Nintendo is known to have laundered some of its lobbying through NCMEC years back and credit card companies and banks have long laundered their wishlist through various LEAs. Turns out if you get a bureaucrat to convince FBI leadership of the importance of your pet cause and the nexus it has to their agency, legislative pushes in Congress tends to follow.

That all said - it works both ways and not necessarily with any negative connotations. The DoJ and FTC in administrations-past have had representatives come to hacker conventions to describe the collaborative efforts they've had with members of the community - to include lobbying congress for legislative change.

Getting government agencies on your side as a partner in affecting policy change is relevant only if the change is seen as relevant to a given agency's mission.

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

#619
post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you're also implicitly ignoring solution 6, which a lot of people elsewhere in this thread are arguing for, which is parents using existing parental control systems built into their devices, which work 100% client side? I'm 100% fine with those, but people report that they're "insufficient" for vague reasons. That's why I suggest we beef them up. Also... > Why? Parental controls at the moment are patchy, poorly…

> Unless you're using the "Two or more people get together to plan something" definition of the word "conspiracy" -which happens to neatly cover planning to go to lunch-, I don't consider this to be a conspiracy. Yes that's the entire point of this whole thread, congrats for getting there in the end. You don't consider this a conspiracy. People like the article author do, and in doing so they miss the mark on having…

> Yes that's the entire point of this whole thread...

Lolno.

1) > An equally important skill is recognizing when those concerns are not genuinely held. Anyone who should know about "Parental Controls" and chooses "Papers Please!" or "Age Please!" is evil. Lawmakers and regulators pushing for this stuff are in this bucket. Anyone who -once introduced to the concept- claims to see no world in which "Parental Controls" can be beefed up and also claims that "Age Please!" or "Papers Please!" is the only viable option is -at minimum- unrecoverably stupid, and is probably also evil.

2) It's right and correct to both publicly call those people out as stupid and/or evil, and to call out those who are not acting with honest intent. As I mentioned earlier, one is under no obligation to be all niceys to people who are interested in tearing yet another chunk out of the vital organs of civic life.

> ...it shows you what's possible even if you're too cynical to believe anyone would ever implement it)

One could implement it. I've never disputed that. It will "accidentally" [0] be put into a system in a way that leaks the information it claims to protect by implementers that fundamentally disagree that the feature needs to exist. One only needs to look at the myriad and varied ways Internet advertising companies (and the users of their platforms) extract sensitive information on users to see that no amount of tech will protect information you enter into a system a company controls if that company gives zero shits about your privacy. The only way to prevent this information from leaking is for the systems involved to never have possessed it in the first place.

[0] ...or perhaps -because of incompetence- actually accidentally...

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

#620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh,there is a constitutional basis to what we're doing. The 4th amendment regulate searches and seizure. I would like the government bodies that have to follow the constitution to respect that. When Flock track movement at scale, when skydio film with uncanny accuracy, when Leonardo build a unique id from your devices. This is infringement. ( See : kyllo vs USA ) I'm playing by the rules of democracy here. And yet yo…

The only thing I am pushing back against is your exhortations to fatalism. Let's be clear about how you started this thread. Walking your critique back to something more reasonable is appreciated. Best of luck in the councils to come.

Where do I exhort to fatalism? That would mean : "there is nothing to be done, why bother"

Let's not turn the table here, I'm the one with a hobby of parsing system logs from surveillance system to prove that police forces are abusing it.

That's not exactly the definition of "letting fate decide". I'm taking action to support my beliefs . To both society and the legal system of our country.

What you might have confused with fatalism is my bleak view on our elected officials. I do have low esteem of them. But I don't think that all elected official are bad. I think they mostly stay too long in power and end up clinging to it, and, yes, getting corrupted in the process.

That last part often bring gasp and shock. But we have to come to term with it: as you stated, no humans are angel, and our elected official have problems.

Nothing that could not be fixed with the right amount of accountability.

Post reply on HN