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

591–598 of 598 posts

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

#591

Post by verisimi »

noosphr wrote: post #548
verisimi wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I got new bike lanes installed around the neogboirhood after I wrote to the local city representative about it, then went to a city where I did a PowerPoint presentation of all the places that you could get killed if the driver wasn't paying attention. It took a month from first letter to new bikelanes.

The speed of turn-around sounds impossible. That you are asking for bike lanes - which is already part of most local agendas - is more believable. I daresay if someone asked for the lanes to be removed, they would not get any traction.

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

#592

Post by drob518 »

account42 wrote: post #578
rolandog wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be written into law that they (the intermediary identity brokers) cannot sell or share any information with data brokers. They should be an independent organization funded by the government, but without its funding tied to yearly renewals (otherwise they would need to curry favor on a yearly manner to whomever is in power).

The danger here is just as much from the government going after undesirable speech as it is about commercial (mis)use of the data.

In fact, that’s the much bigger threat.

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

#593

Post by drob518 »

angiolillo wrote: post #475
drob518 wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not for the kids. That’s just the excuse. In order to validate kids, they really need to identify everyone. That’s the real play.

> It’s not for the kids. That’s just the excuse. Is is an excuse for some, sure. But we will fail at pushing back if we ignore that there are a meaningful number of concerned parents who support solutions like this because they have become aware of the danger that social media presents. For many of them, self-attestation of age at the OS account level is likely sufficient, not to mention much simpler to implement and…

To be sure, social media is a problem for our children. No doubt about it. But the solution is to take screens from the children, not set up the foundation of a police state.

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

#594

Post by ghusto »

urbnspacecowboy wrote: post #238
ghusto wrote: post #193

If you want to stop this instance of "think of the children", build a working and cheap alternative that respects privacy. It is technically possible, so if you feel as strongly about it as your words suggest, do it. Once it's ready, spread awareness through old-media, new-media, politicians, everything and every means.

Here's my working and cheap alternative that respects privacy: Don't do it! Seriously now, if you give in to demanding people, they will just demand more. Appeasement does not work.

To be even more specific then: Working and cheap alternative to the very real problem that this solves. It's not a made up problem, even though the current proposed solution was just shopping for a problem to solve so it could sell itself.

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

#595

Post by akimbostrawman »

broost3r wrote: post #306
GeekyBear wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can control which apps children can install, how much time they are allowed to use those apps a day, decide if they have access to the web, which web sites they can visit, and decide who they are allowed to communicate with. What features are missing that makes everyone giving up their privacy a better option?

granular control over push notifications would be great see: recent article about Snap sending pushes to kids during school hours

How about not installing/allowing a grooming chat app in the first place?

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

#597

Post by Humorist2290 »

ruffrey wrote: post #494
Humorist2290 wrote: post #384

In many states, children under some age are prohibited from using firearms. There is substantial evidence to show that firearms pose a real and present harm to individual children and large groups. An excellent rider to the KIDS act would be to mandate the installation of age (that is, identity) verification to all firearms in order to disable the safety.

It is hard to tell if this is a joke based on the username. There are people with this perspective though I assume. Thus I will respond to it. It's worth noting OP's proposed technology is impossibly far from existing in practice. Importantly, there are at least half a billion citizen-owned firearms in the USA without this theoretical technology, already. Therefore we should focus on something more effective. Such as…

Yeah the suggestion is mostly facetious and I realize impracticable. As the other commenter mentioned -- it's a poison pill. If such a rider were added to the KIDS Act it would be dead in the water, without a doubt.

Though I think it's worth noting that age verification _without_ identity verification is basically as impracticable, and arguably more dangerous.

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

#598

Post by Humorist2290 »

BeetleB wrote: post #504
Humorist2290 wrote: post #384

In many states, children under some age are prohibited from using firearms. There is substantial evidence to show that firearms pose a real and present harm to individual children and large groups. An excellent rider to the KIDS act would be to mandate the installation of age (that is, identity) verification to all firearms in order to disable the safety.

Fun fact: Most firearms don't have a manual safety that you disengage.

That is indeed a fun fact. One of those things I didn't realize, but immediately believe. Most of the gun owners I know have at least one or two antiques which predate modern notions like "safety" by quite a bit. They are fascinating technology, and they make for incredible family heirlooms.

To stay consistent with my point though, if we mandate that everyone must ID verify to access the internet, I think it's just as reasonable we mandate that all such antiques be forcibly modernized with some sort of 5G-connected ID scanner. For the children of course.

Post reply on HN