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

Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

citizens-initiative.europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 313 posts

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#241

Post by account42 »

adiabatichottub wrote: post #202
intrasight wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be a right you want but it's not a right you have. There is no need to track access beyond what is already tracked.

I consider such rights to be my natural rights, regardless of statute. This is a product of my personal ethics and philosophy. In that sense, it is a right that I have. Whether I can successfully exercise that right without proscription is what I am concerned about.

It's interesting that perhaps some things are only not commonly listed as human rights only because it was impractical to deprive people of those rights before the digitization of society. The right to uncensored personal communication could be one of them.

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#242

Post by laylower »

urbandw311er wrote: post #169

The physical world has age checks when kids attempt to enter a premises with dangerous or unsuitable content - eg bars, casinos, strip joints. These seem largely accepted as a good thing. Why do so many seem to feel that the same protections are so outrageous when applied in the virtual world? Honest question, I can see both sides.

Because history has taught us that we cannot expect governments and corpos not to overstep. If in the physical world you want to verify someone's age you look at physical characteristics. You don't ask them to submit their entire life for you to review. You only get what you can see there at the moment. Government does not control that.

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#243

Post by tremon »

Someone100 wrote: post #205
b112 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49080929 There is discussion about LLMs, models, CSAM, undressing people with AI, and posting those images to places. No handy wavy stuff, makes this problem go away due to filtering at creation. That's because, open models are a thing. So you either ban all open models, or maybe make it a crime to publish uncensored models, or you punish what individuals do on the internet…

Who cares if they undress people with AI. Its slop and not worth restricting liberties over it.

The people depicted in unauthorised AI nudes circulating the Internet might care.

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#244

Post by everdrive »

KPGv2 wrote: post #113
everdrive wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet of the future is an IQ test. Are you smart enough to get in, do your work in a focused manner, and get out so that you live your life? Many, many people will fail this test.

Counterpoint: meatspace is awful unless you're a normie. Christ, the day I got out of my small town and into a major city university dorm room with fast Internet was the day my life opened up. I found people with my interests. Etc. "The Internet sucks. Get offline," is the battle cry of someone who likes Marvel movies and the book that Target has at the checkout line, or lives in one of about five cities in the USA.

I really do understand your sentiment, but please remember that "meatspace" is the whole world. You can hate stupid marvel movies and chain department stores all you like, but the entire world of books, hobbies, technology, etc. is available to you.

I'm not joking: I'll bet that NO ONE at your local library cares that you're weird so long as you're polite and follow the rules.

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#245

Post by account42 »

rypskar wrote: post #207
urbandw311er wrote: post #169

The physical world has age checks when kids attempt to enter a premises with dangerous or unsuitable content - eg bars, casinos, strip joints. These seem largely accepted as a good thing. Why do so many seem to feel that the same protections are so outrageous when applied in the virtual world? Honest question, I can see both sides.

When someone need to age check me in real life they make a quick look at me and decide they don't have to check any id. On steam I had to put in my age to see the page for GTA, even when being logged in with an account that is older than 18 years. It is a reason why it is Meta and the like that lobbies the most for age controls, they want more information about everyone

My experience with US supermarkets is that they ID check you always even if you are obviously over 21.

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#246

Post by xtiansimon »

It’s interesting to *imagine* the future development of “The System” of segregation.

Government driving changes to laws, imposing fines on platforms which create EULAs resulting in technological controls (or alarm flags)—whether you can bypass it or not—leading to irreversible bans and prosecutions. Growing disenfranchised. Those who do not materially support the system are left out, and the laws prevent new players. /imagined dystopian future.

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#247

Post by account42 »

adiabatichottub wrote: post #187
tavavex wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that the dossier about your visit is then photocopied and mailed to several other places in addition to being in the bar's closet. Each one of those places is staffed 24/7 by workers that organize incoming data, as well as people who tirelessly look at the growing personal file of every person that has ever done anything, and make accurate deductions based on what they see. Who you know, what you like, w…

A decade ago I used to joke that Google should have it's own dating app. "NOTIFICATION: See that person at the other end of the bar? They share the same interests as you and like to frequent some of the same places. They share your political views. You even have some friends in common. They are recently single. Go over and say hi, here are some suggested conversation topics..." It just seems too obvious now

It's funny how little Google actually does with the data they have on you aside from trying to sell your eyeballs for more money.

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#248

Post by bigfishrunning »

mothballed wrote: post #155
bigfishrunning wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not in all states. In my home state of Pennsylvania, it's only legal to have alcohol delivered by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board. It is not legal to order directly from producers. The laws do indeed vary by state.

> it's only legal to have alcohol delivered by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board. It is not legal to order directly from producers. You are full of shit. Opinion safely discarded. https://www.pa.gov/agencies/lcb/shop-wine-spirits/direct-win... >The laws do indeed vary by state. I am not disputing that. I am disputing that "most US states, they require the delivery driver to recheck the ID in person" (the original…

While I admit I was wrong, I can say that I didn't actually express any opinion, so there was nothing for you to discard. I do appreciate the rude reply though, thank you for making the environment here so pleasant.

Re: Stop Killing the Internet: No Digital ID and No Age Verification

#249

Post by perching_aix »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #234
perching_aix wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a digital ID does not obviate that (in principle), thanks to zero-knowledge schemes. To my understanding then, the issue is that the EU's implementation only has a ZK-based solution in the plans so far. But then this initiative says "No Digital ID", not "No Auto-Deanonymizable Digital ID", so...

> Having a digital ID does not obviate that (in principle), thanks to zero-knowledge schemes. Yes it does, because zero-knowledge schemes take it as an assumption that all of the people who are supposed to have credentials can be trusted not to share them with people who aren't, since you're proposing a system that provides no means for that to be detected. And this context doesn't allow that assumption. With a norma…

> Yes it does, because zero-knowledge schemes take it as an assumption that all of the people who are supposed to have credentials can be trusted not to share them with people who aren't

No, ZK schemes have absolutely nothing to do with sybil resistance. That's a threat modeling concern anyways.

If your point is that the entire digital ID plan is nascent because it remains vulnerable to sybil attacks, that it may very well be, and so indeed there would need to be extra-technological measures to ensure the 1:1 mapping. That is no longer a cryptographic or technological concern however, but a governance and incentivization one.

It also means that it can't "kill the internet" then though, doesn't it?

> which obviously doesn't work when they're not being provided with any identifying information. You thereby have no way to know that the ID belongs to the user and anyone can allow anyone else to use their ID, thereby defeating the system

This is about digital identification. The facts you list off are beyond the analog hole. What you describe is (or at least should be) a non-goal for any scheme in this context, because it is fundamentally unsolveable.

> Which means that the proponents would never be satisfied with the result and the only thing building that system does is entrench something with the shape of a non-consensual identification system

This is (loaded) political speculation, not an argument.

Post reply on HN