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

Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 263 posts

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#201

Post by triceratops »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #162
CrossVR wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't trust that the information about my identity would not be recorded while selling me my "free speech token". So the chilling effect on free speech would be exactly the same.

That would largely depend on the implementation details I think. Both those of the ID check itself as well as the precise nature of the tokens. Consider a somewhat extreme example. A preprinted paper ticket with nothing more than a serial number on it. The clerk only visually inspects the ID document then enters the serial number into a web portal and hands it to you. When you go to "redeem" it the service relays the…

> The clerk only visually inspects the ID document then enters the serial number into a web portal and hands it to you.

No absolutely not. There's no need for it. We don't require Internet connected beer cans to phone home to a government server and recheck your driver's license when you're cracking them open.

> When you go to "redeem" it the service relays the number back to the government server rather than your local device doing so directly

Your possession of the token when you enter it into your social media account is proof enough that you're of age. The social media website only needs to call the token issuer's API to verify its validity. And all the token issuer should know is it's a valid token sold to a buyer of legal age. Anything more is needlessly complicated and risks anonymity. No recording of IDs in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

And there's no need to involve the government or government servers in any of the implementation or technology. It can be an open, published standard. Any company that can get their cards in stores, and sold with age verification, should be able to participate. All participants can be periodically inspected by the government to ensure compliance with standards.

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#202

Post by cvoss »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #89
cmptrnerd6 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also recommend that podcast but I would suggest balancing it with '5-4' podcast or 'strict scrutiny'. Sara and David do a very good job explaining both sides and the law but there are times I think advisory opinions could spend more time on the arguments made by the other side or the weaker portions of their supported view.

Strict scrutiny is fantastic

Oof, I couldn't stand to make it through one episode of Strict Scrutiny. It was a political podcast dressed up as if it were a legal podcast. Not interested.

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#203

Post by gosub100 »

andrewflnr wrote: post #101
devsda wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Law is a strange and possibly the only aspect in human societies where people are by default assumed to know, understand and follow it to the letter when everybody acknowledges that law is open to interpretation. You cannot in most cases claim ignorance as it can be abused by criminals. But there is whole industry of education, profession, journals, blogs, podcasts and videos trying to teach, interpret and explain th…

Strange and destructive. I believe comprehensible law is a human right that is critically underacknowledged. Like, up there with the right to speech and a fair trial. If you cannot understand the law as it applies to you, you cannot possibly be free under that law, because your actions will always be constrained by your uncertainty.

A corollary to your second paragraph is that you can concentrate power if you keep the masses from understanding it fully or able to practice it competently. This is why passing the bar exam is so difficult. What if most criminals were as adept at fighting their charges as they are at physically fighting? (Meaning: won a healthy percentage of the time). The system is designed to crush people and concentrate wealth and power in the hands of a few.

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#204

Post by AlotOfReading »

pmdr wrote: post #143
pjc50 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The app stores already block porn on their own initiative. > I also wonder why smut literature (the best selling category of books on Amazon) seems to get a free pass. It's popular with women and basically invisible to men.

And being long-form written text, likely invisible to minors as well.

It's extremely visible to teenagers. They're one of the main audiences for booktok.

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#205

Post by BlarfMcFlarf »

immibis wrote: post #165
Dumblydorr wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not the ideal of the system. We shouldn’t have two tiered justice, the top should be being held accountable. Adams and Jefferson wrestled with another question. J said generations shouldn’t be tied to the decisions of their ancestors. Adams said but surely laws are necessary to maintain stability and order and preserve their fragile democracy for future generations.

Ideal and reality are rarely in alignment, and reality is what we need to be concerned with.

Reality is short term thinking.

Idealism is long term thinking.

If you disregard reality, you will never understand the world around you to make change.

If you disregard idealism, you will only ever be able to react. You will end up dragged around by the nose, and pulled towards someone elses ideal that might not be so good for you.

Thinking that power is inviolable is an idealism that benefits existing power. They don’t want you to think of the countless times power has been overthrown, and a more just society has been built on the ruins of one with benefits for only those with power.

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#206

Post by xgulfie »

TimByte wrote: post #148
GeekyBear wrote: post #12

> we are concerned that SB2420 impacts the privacy of users by requiring the collection of sensitive, personally identifiable information to download any app, even if a user simply wants to check the weather or sports scores. Avoiding the collection of user data in the first place (if it's possible) is exactly the correct approach to user privacy.

Soo the strongest form of privacy protection isn't better storage or better policies, it's simply not creating the data in the first place

Yes. It's more secure to have your website simply not require the user's SSN than to implement the best security in the world to handle their SSN.

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#207

Post by horsawlarway »

tennysont wrote: post #200
ralferoo wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The legal question is posed: Who is liable under Roman law? My question is why does anybody have to be liable at all? Most normal people would consider this just to be a freak accident. Sure, there's learning points that can be taken from it to prevent similar incidents - e.g. erecting a fetch around the field (why didn't you suggest that the field owner be liable) as it can be reasonably foreseen the situation of…

That's such a strange interpretation that disagrees with my intuition. If the Yankees hit a practice ball out of their stadium and into my house, causing bodily harm to a loved one, I wouldn't be satisfied with any of the reasoning in your comment. More generally, people are allowed to take on risk as per their own appetite, but legal liability allows risk-hungry individuals to be incentive-aligned with everyone else…

I don't actually find it a particularly strange interpretation.

Here's another lens:

I install cabinets in your kitchen. Your loved one trips, hits the cabinets, breaks their neck and dies.

Should I be liable in this case as well? I did a thing that was involved in harming your loved one... if the cabinet hadn't been there, they might not have died.

---

In both cases, it's pretty clear that there's no intent to harm your loved one. At best you're arguing that it was "foreseeable" that hitting a baseball might harm someone, and that it wasn't "foreseeable" that installing cabinets would harm someone.

But clearly that's ALSO wrong, because we know people have been hurt hitting cabinets before.

So clarify how you'd assign blame in this case, and why it's different from the baseball case?

Basically - your stance is that risk is always a decision someone has made, but I find disagrees with my intuition. Risk is an inherent part of life.

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#208

Post by morshu9001 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #186
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #2

Judge Robert Pitman said that it violates the First Amendment and is "more likely than not - unconstitutional." The Act is akin to a law that would require every bookstore to verify the age of every customer at the door and, for minors, require parental consent before the child or teen could enter and again when they try to purchase a book. We enjoy 1A protections of speech and assembly. When we consider our rights,…

This protection is not provided by judges or the Bill of Rights. It’s provided by the attitude and behaviours of all Americans. If enough Americans start treating 1A as conditional, the court decisions will slowly start reflecting that. The system won’t protect the people from themselves.

Yeah, but slowly is an understatement. Scotus judges serve until death, and they're appointed rather than elected. Even then, they're allowed to make very unpopular decisions.

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#209

Post by lacoolj »

Palmik wrote: post #123

I wonder why Texas did not start by targeting NSFW / porn apps specifically, like other states. I also wonder why smut literature (the best selling category of books on Amazon) seems to get a free pass.

Probably because some apps aren't NSFW apps but have it (Reddit)

Re: Texas app store age verification law blocked by federal judge

#210

Post by nine_k »

TimByte wrote: post #148
GeekyBear wrote: post #12

> we are concerned that SB2420 impacts the privacy of users by requiring the collection of sensitive, personally identifiable information to download any app, even if a user simply wants to check the weather or sports scores. Avoiding the collection of user data in the first place (if it's possible) is exactly the correct approach to user privacy.

Soo the strongest form of privacy protection isn't better storage or better policies, it's simply not creating the data in the first place

Instead of fixing consequences, eliminate the cause? It sounds almost like common sense.

I think most laws should look reasonable from the common-sense viewpoint. And when they don't, there should be a serious explanation.

Post reply on HN