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

Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

news.dyne.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 486 posts

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#181

Post by bluegatty »

cluckindan wrote: post #18

It’s not even a debate if these controls are problematic. The litmus test is to mentally substitute the age field for an ancestry field and place the system in 1930’s Germany. Coincidently, that system was provided by IBM.

'Preventing children from buying guns is Nazism!'

Actually, this sentiment is a 'litmus test' for common sense.

We use age discrimination universally in all affairs, across the globe, across all cultures.

Of course the same thing is going to apply to 'content', it's just a lot harder and creates ugly externalizations.

It's a real problem, with no real solutions, at least not yet.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#182

Post by DaSHacka »

foltik wrote: post #97
Tarq0n wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like the "those in power" framing because it implies that they all participated and that such a homogenous group even exists.

In the USA it literally is two homogenous groups though? One of which is majorly complicit in covering up the files, against their constituents’ wishes.

I would say both parties are complicit at this point.

Keep in mind Epstein died in 2017. We had two GOP terms and one Democrat term from then to now.

With what we know from the files that have been released thus far (and how obviously the worst if it has either been shredded or will never see the light of day), the fact they refused to release/prosecute those implicated tells you all you need to know.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#183

Post by panzi »

txrx0000 wrote: post #151

We have to separate child protection from Internet control so that the "protect the kids" narrative loses its potency. So here's a counter-narrative: we can implement digital child protection without Internet-wide access control, and it requires just 3 simple features that can be implemented in less than a week. There's no need to introduce new laws at all. This could just be done tomorrow if there is genuine will to…

1) Could be simpler for a start if 2) ensures that no web sites that send a special "over 18" server header are displayed. The header could be more detailed and the parent could select what things are allowed, but for a start make it simple.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#184

Post by timschmidt »

rdevilla wrote: post #179
timschmidt wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that Abraham Lincoln literally had all the nation's telegraph lines routed through DC during the civil war, and AT&T has been an honorary branch of the US government ever since.

That tradition was carried into the modern era. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

I'm aware. And the GP you're responding to's username is echelon. I think they're aware as well.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#185

Post by gosub100 »

gruez wrote: post #176
gosub100 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The resistance to the release of the files including redactions and outright refusal of Congressional order is enough to reveal the magnitude of what's going on. I would even dare say this Iran war is in part due to blackmail gained on DJT.

>The resistance to the release of the files including redactions and outright refusal of Congressional order is enough to reveal the magnitude of what's going on. I agree this makes him look suspect, but it's hardly conclusive. Moreover Democrats did a similar U-turn a few years before. The only difference is that they weren't bombastically pushing the conspiracy theory during the election campaign, which made it eas…

I dont disagree with anything you have written in the above reply. But why does democrats' reversal somehow annul or invalidate the claim about trump? Do you honestly believe it could all be an overly-embellished fable? If you do, then do you think the hundreds, some-say-thousands, of women who claim they were raped are lying?

Another explanation could be the democrats' AIPAC handlers told them to back off because it wasn't the precise time to leverage the material yet.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#186

Post by Spooky23 »

hunterpayne wrote: post #89
mpalmer wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mostly Meta lobbying for this, in every state. Sensationalizing and exaggerating does not help.

But why is Meta lobbying for this? The bills they push move compliance onto the app stores. And Meta doesn't run an app store. I think the execs think its some sort of 4D chess move to put liabilities onto their competitors. I'm not sure it will work out that way. Seems like FB has a lot more to lose than they think.

They would be no longer responsible for doing it.

My kid had classmates as young as 8 using it. Facebook knows this.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#187

Post by signalfour »

poly2it wrote: post #155
abcde666777 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I don't disagree with the sentiment of keeping trans ideology away from kids, in exactly the way I'd want to protect them from any kind of religious indoctrination.

Gender dysphoria can be medically studied, is not an ideology and is not a disorder. Hope this clears things up.

It stopped being centered around gender dysphoria quite a while ago. Gender identity is where it's at now, and the idea that one does not need to be dysphoric to be trans is currently the most mainstream one.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#188

Post by peyton »

hunterpayne wrote: post #89
mpalmer wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mostly Meta lobbying for this, in every state. Sensationalizing and exaggerating does not help.

But why is Meta lobbying for this? The bills they push move compliance onto the app stores. And Meta doesn't run an app store. I think the execs think its some sort of 4D chess move to put liabilities onto their competitors. I'm not sure it will work out that way. Seems like FB has a lot more to lose than they think.

Think of how many quadrillions of hours under-18 spend online. Ads for verified 18+ are more profitable.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#189

Post by bluegatty »

rustyhancock wrote: post #125

Quite mind boggling to me that a nanny state can exhurt such a large amount of global control. It's darkly comedic that the single most toxic experience since the pop up ad - the cookie consent popup was similarly imposed. The solution is simple. Websites and services (including ISPs) become governed by the country in which they operate not the whims of foreign entities.

Where do all these people come from?

The 'nanny state' prevents people from driving cars without a license?

That prevents you from buying myriad substances without a note from the doctor?

That makes it illegal for you to buy a gun?

" become governed by the country in which they operate not the whims of foreign entities"

... is not going to work, at face value, because 'operation' involves the consumer and the producer, each of whom may be in different jurisdictions, and even if they were in the 'same nation' ... this is still a hard problem.

No easy answers, and there are legit concerns.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#190

Post by rdevilla »

echelon wrote: post #163
scotty79 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ruin political candidates, powerful CEOs, and wealthy people This is mostly fantasy propagated by works of fiction. In the real world release of any evidence of sins has practically zero impact on the wealthy people and when it very occasionally does have an impact it just happens in cases of people who weren't wealthy enough for the circumstances.

The Epstein Island isn't just a fantasy playground for sickos. Every single one of those people has a noose around their neck and is being told what to do. They have a gun to their head now. The intelligence apparatus has been exploiting dynamics like this for a long time.

The west runs on blackmail. If they can't find any dirt on you, you're not getting into power, and that's a fact.
Post reply on HN