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

US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 369 posts

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#171

Post by Jamesbeam »

loloquwowndueo wrote: post #97
Jamesbeam wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No worries, by that time so many people will have lost their jobs because of AI that you can hire a homeless person to register all your devices for a snickers. Dirty Mike and the Boys are going to own a lot of mobile devices, and control the world trade of snickers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FkK8ZFE7Y0 The CIA hates that trick.

lol what makes you think YOU won’t be the homeless person.

I got a house with a 25-year roof, an indestructible Japanese shitbox car I can repair myself from scrap if I have to, and enough in the bank at three to five percent to pay my taxes, all of my hobbies, eating steak every day if I wanted and my share of the universal multi-payer health care system in my country.

That puts me for the rest of my life at a level of fuck you.

And if the system breaks down, I’m just going to hunt and eat you. How big do you think your chance of survival is meeting someone hungry who spent over a decade in war and conflict zones and is still here?

I’m more concerned about the future for your sake than for mine.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#172

Post by seethishat »

iamnothere wrote: post #118
ButlerianJihad wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> abolishing anonymity on the Internet. Firstly, you keep using that word; I do not think it means what you think it means. On the Internet, especially forums such as HN, you are "pseudonymous". That is, you made up a name for yourself, and that's how you're known to others. At the very least, we are all identified by IP addresses, which are again, fairly stable and unique pseudonyms. There are nearly zero truly anon…

My coffeehouse running an obsolete consumer router and accepting only cash actually has zero record of who I am.

How many cameras do you drive past and walk by to get to the coffee shop ;)

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#173

Post by nhecker »

iamnothere wrote: post #141
laughing_man wrote: post #133

I'm glad I got to see the era where the internet was useful and exciting. I feel like every major change since about 2010 has pushed it more toward blandness and made it less useful. This will be a big one. They're building the groundwork for a world-wide dystopia.

Come join us on what I will call the “scatternet”, the globally distributed, offline-first, async network full of all the things that made the old Internet great. Save a few ISOs of still-free OSes and hoard a few extra cheap computers. (You might also want to get a 10Mhz capable radio.)

Why the 10 MHz radio?

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#174

Post by Teknomadix »

iamnothere wrote: post #117
xt00 wrote: post #2

Do we know who is funding this? is this one of these things where Meta doesn't want the responsibility for this, so they are pushing to have the OS have the responsibility or something like that?

Detailed here: https://agelesslinux.org/lobbyists.html

This should be a pinned top comment.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#175

Post by hammock »

svillar wrote: post #89

This is equivalent to China’s Digital ID without branding it as such - because such branding would fail. They are laying the foundation at the infrastructure layer to build a Digital surveillance net, look at the pieces with the eye of an Architect - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/15/banks-citizenship-data-colle... And https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8250...

This. We need to stop calling this “age verification.” You are uploading your full ID. Not your age.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#176

Post by iamnothere »

nhecker wrote: post #173
iamnothere wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come join us on what I will call the “scatternet”, the globally distributed, offline-first, async network full of all the things that made the old Internet great. Save a few ISOs of still-free OSes and hoard a few extra cheap computers. (You might also want to get a 10Mhz capable radio.)

Why the 10 MHz radio?

For sporadic medium-long distance communication over packet radio. 10MHz isn’t too crowded and can be easily used for regional communications (and occasionally long distance) via atmospheric bounce. It also works well at low power and the antenna is shorter than other long distance modes like the longer wave HF bands (20m+).

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#177

Post by brightball »

iamnothere wrote: post #176
nhecker wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the 10 MHz radio?

For sporadic medium-long distance communication over packet radio. 10MHz isn’t too crowded and can be easily used for regional communications (and occasionally long distance) via atmospheric bounce. It also works well at low power and the antenna is shorter than other long distance modes like the longer wave HF bands (20m+).

Running a network of old school BBS's over radio would be great

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#178

Post by kakwa_ »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #103
RobotToaster wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is horribly vague. >a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. It leaves open to interpretation if it applies to all computers, or just general purpose ones. Does a car count as a mobile device?

> It leaves open to interpretation if it applies to all computers, or just general purpose ones. That's not even the worst part: > a person that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system Suppose you write a generic piece of code that some third party then includes in an operating system, but you're the only relevant person in the jurisdiction. Are you now an "operating system provider"? If the "operating s…

IMHO, the law tries to target the last entity which has practical control over the OS design and implementation aka the final developer/integrator.

For example in the Linux world, it's the distributions.

Where it gets murky is with Android (and to a lesser extent Windows).

IMHO, the entities which should be responsible are Google and Microsoft.

But since vendors, specially in the Android world, can heavily tweak the OS, there is a case that it's more the device manufacturers like Samsung which are responsible.

The relevant interpretation in practice will usually happen naturally, and the most ambiguous stuff will be set by jurisprudence if necessary.

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#179

Post by alphawhisky »

Jamesbeam wrote: post #171
loloquwowndueo wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol what makes you think YOU won’t be the homeless person.

I got a house with a 25-year roof, an indestructible Japanese shitbox car I can repair myself from scrap if I have to, and enough in the bank at three to five percent to pay my taxes, all of my hobbies, eating steak every day if I wanted and my share of the universal multi-payer health care system in my country. That puts me for the rest of my life at a level of fuck you. And if the system breaks down, I’m just going…

Cannibalism threats on HN - is this a recession indicator?

Re: US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

#180

Post by stogot »

cubefox wrote: post #168
kardianos wrote: post #162

I hope people realize that most of these bills are being introduced in blue states by Democrats. Republicans may not like porn, but they put the onus where it belongs, on the operator, not on the OS.

> A bill introduced by Representative Josh Gottheimer in the House on April 13 Josh Gottheimer is indeed a Democrat.

I noticed when the party name is hidden in news articles, it’s often that party as I always have to go look for the rep’s page
Post reply on HN