Live data from Hacker News

Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

thecentersquare.com

121–130 of 143 posts

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> threads about children and social media or short form video will draw a lot of comments supporting harsh age restrictions I think there should be age restrictions. I prefer to do it in a privacy-preserving way. But I’m also not happy about conditioning the former on the existence of the latter.

One component is to stop building tools that exploit impressionable minds.

They exploit all minds. But adults can make that choice responsibly. Kids cannot. We age gate alcohol and cigarettes. Social media is no different.

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Sheets is slower/has enough usability issues it's not an option and OpenOffice is missing a few features too, not to mention neither really can do VBA at all, nor do they have PowerQuery. So Excel it is.

Is this stuff… like, good? I don’t know anything about the MS ecosystem. If you could start from scratch, would using something more like Python, pandas, that sort of stuff, be viable?

Excel works, the VBA macros with random business rules work, people with business knowledge know how to use it, the workflows are set up.

If we were starting from nothing it wouldn't be built, but the value of what already exists is massive.

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an international coordinated effort to undermine every single citizen's privacy, an agenda being pushed for years, again and again in every country and state, by a coalition including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc., corporations that profit greatly from mandatory identity verification online. It's only a matter of time until they buy out enough politicians to push it through and force future generations to li…

> a coalition including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc., corporations that profit greatly from mandatory identity verification online. This is not being pushed by private companies. There is no money in it. It is being pushed by governments, and those governments use those private companies as (willing) vehicles to do things that it is illegal for them to do directly. And it is not being pushed by the democratic po…

"There is no money in tying online activities to a real identity" is a hot take.

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we have to live in a panopticon... So that's where we are now? "If we have to live in the torture nexus, let's at least make it equitable"

The fact that you couldn't identify it as sarcasm/satire is indictive of not having an accurate understanding of your opponents position. If you want to defeat your opponents, understand their calculus.

I surely have no idea what you're talking about. I wasn't even responding to you. Hmmmmm yes. Calculus. Defeating opponents. Indubitably.

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#125
post #39

What's with the bipartisan push for these bills all of a sudden?

It's not called a uniparty for nothing. Vote red, vote blue, we're all gonna end up in the same place eventually, the only difference is the timeline (pretty interesting that the first states pushing this stuff are California, Colorado, Illinois, etc. -- not exactly who you imagine being concerned with "think of the children", is it?). All the bickering between the two parties is pro wrestling kayfabe at the end of t…

Details matter. The California law and the others that seem to be modeled after it involves no actual age verification and no presentation of any identifying documents to anyone. It just requires that devices include a system that lets parents when setting up a child's device specify an age range and requires that things that need to check age use the range the parent specified.

This is the general approach that privacy advocates have said should be taken. It is just what I'd expect from a liberal state that has a record of trying to protect privacy but wants to address the issue of how to keep children from sites that are not suitable.

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#126
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "We're unable to serve this website without compromising your privacy... " More accurately, "we do not have the staff or funds to figure out what every single random law around the globe requires of us, and since foreign countries are not a realistic advertising market for a local Michigan newspaper, there's really no reason for us to try."

Well, you don't have to do any of that stuff if you either are upfront about selling user data and ask if it's OK, or if you just don't do that stuff at all.

If your site is covered by GDPR and you do not have a physical presence in the EU you have to appoint someone in the EU to receive mail on your behalf, so people who want to make GDPR requests by mail can write to them. See Article 27.

There are services that will do this for you. Last I checked they were typically in the neighborhood of a couple hundred Euros a year.

Whether or not GDPR applies to a site not in the EU is somewhat subjective. It comes down to whether you envisaged serving people in the EU.

If your site does not need EU visitors it can make some sense to block them. That provides evidence that you did not envisage serving people in the EU, and then you don't have to figure out if you need to be hiring a service in the EU to receive GDPR mail.

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an international coordinated effort to undermine every single citizen's privacy, an agenda being pushed for years, again and again in every country and state, by a coalition including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc., corporations that profit greatly from mandatory identity verification online. It's only a matter of time until they buy out enough politicians to push it through and force future generations to li…

I hate privacy, even down to the idea itself. I will buy out politicians, and push relentlessly until every trace of privacy is eliminated from the world. I love being watched. The idea of a panopticon makes me feel amazing and I want to force it on everyone until the end of time.

Good news!

To execute your plan of buying out politicians, you would be following a blueprint already perfected by extraordinarily wealthy individuals and corporate interests. Through a system of dark money and untraceable nonprofit front groups, billionaires have successfully created what amounts to a permanent, private political machine that rivals official political parties. Following the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, the ultra-wealthy were given more or less free rein to spend as much as they want in support of their favored candidates. This ruling enabled a tiny elite to funnel limitless cash into outside organizations, essentially allowing them to buy elections and steer government policy without public accountability. As one major political donor noted, this massive spending is treated as an investment designed to yield a specific governing philosophy and tangible returns.

Your fascination with the panopticon actually echoes the early days of industrial capitalism. The original concept for the Panopticon was conceived by Samuel Bentham as a way to turn the Deptford docks into a "regular police state" to enforce strict wage labor. He envisioned building a giant central tower to guarantee the constant surveillance of workers, an idea that his brother Jeremy later famously adapted into the prison model you are familiar with today.

The infrastructure for your desired panopticon is already highly advanced through both corporate and state apparatuses. Privacy in the workplace is already profoundly insecure. Employers have wide legal latitude to monitor their workers, with surveys showing that up to two-thirds of companies actively record employee phone calls, voicemails, emails, review computer files, and use video surveillance.

The modern digital economy operates on a model of "surveillance capitalism," where companies offer seemingly "free" services in exchange for mining user engagement. This business model relies entirely on harvesting personal data from every click, post, and search to craft detailed profiles, a practice that fundamentally deemphasizes and eliminates user privacy for profit.

Government agencies have developed a staggering capacity to spy on everyday life. Police and intelligence fusion centers utilize facial recognition, "Stingray" cell phone surveillance equipment, and massive data-mining software to monitor citizens. This includes actively spying on telephone and electronic communications in direct collusion with major communications corporations. Furthermore, government contractors like Palantir provide federal agencies with software capable of tracking billions of data points, explicitly collecting information from Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, SMS texts, web surfing activity, and live telephone calls. Authorities can also readily deploy electronic devices, telephone tapping, and intercepted mail to completely bypass secrecy.

In short, the mechanisms to eliminate privacy—from the financial blueprints required to buy political compliance to the technological tools necessary for constant, panoptic observation—are already deeply embedded in modern political and economic systems.

You're welcome!

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has reached the level of moral panic, so it’s the current topic everywhere. Even on Hacker News, threads about children and social media or short form video will draw a lot of comments supporting harsh age restrictions, including an alarming number of extremist comments in favor banning under-18s from using the internet or phones. It’s not until the discussion turns to implantation details that the sentiment swing…

Thank you for saying this. I've been similarly baffled. The call to ban children from social media seemed like it was coming loudest from tech people - like HN users. How did they think this was going to work?

There is no shortage of reactionary "tech people". They likely didn't think a bit about how this would work. Just ban kids from social media to protect the kids! And then their line of thought stops there. At the same time you've got people on HN asking for better parental controls. And when state governments push for exactly that, parental controls that still preserve individual privacy, everyone loses their fucking minds. Your operating system reporting an age range that you define so apps and websites can filter content appropriately is not a privacy violation. It's literally what people have been asking for. But this community wants to protect children from the internet and "dangers of social media" and also refuses to build any mechanism that distinguishes children from adults that don't violate privacy.

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you aren’t using iCloud for any of this, why use it at all? I believe you can still use an iPhone without an iCloud account, can’t you? Nope, You have to have an apple account tied to a physical phone number or you can't sign in on the device or use it at all and they opt you in to the 5GB free plan and yes, the 30 sliders is apps but that doesn't alter the fact that I want to be asked before they exfiltrate my…

I daily my work MacBook without an Apple account or phone number. And no, it’s not in ABM, or any other MDE. App Store is unavailable because of the missing account, but it does not prevent me from using the device like you’re claiming.

An iPhone with no apps is pretty hard to use. A mac doesn't need the app store, but when I last set one up, I needed to install the devtools from the appstore to bootstrap macports or whatever, so that pushed me into an account.

Re: Michigan 'digital age' bills pulled after privacy concerns raised

#130
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

European law imposes a great deal more obligations on a business than that. This claim is simplistic to the point of disingenuousness.

Since obviously there is no "European law" in the first place, I think it's pretty safe to assume you have no idea what you're talking about.

That would be rather surprising to the large number of law schools that teach European Law as a core subject, such as the Panthéon-Sorbonne (Droit européen), Bologna U (Diritto Europeo), and Humboldt U (Europarecht).

Equally surprised would be the authors of very many legal books and journals, e.g. https://www.cambridge.org/core/browse-subjects/law/european-...

Post reply on HN