Live data from Hacker News

The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

effort.news

391–400 of 806 posts

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While what you say seem intuitive, it is missing one point. Those locations probably are not recording exactly who is coming and going and what they are saying/doing. That is where this become more than just gate keeping and becomes full on tracking.

You are saying something quite different to the comment I responded to: > The right people to protect children are those responsible for them - their parents and guardians. My position is that there is a social responsibility to protect children which extends to the community at large, not just their immediate guardians.

Yes. There is also an inequality issue because not all parents/guardians are equipped to afford the same protections for their children. For example, there are parents out there who would let their children smoke at 8 years old because they don't care. This isn't fair. Such lack of care becomes abuse and parents shouldn't have a right to abuse their children.

It's really on us to figure out how we can have things like the internet without harming children. Now, this is quite annoying, because I have never, and would never, give a child access to the internet in the first place. The internet was never driving around on public streets. I never wanted to force it on anyone.

We all dropped the ball here. We've all accepted and even celebrated more and more of our lives being online. But, more importantly, nobody noticed when children started to get smartphones with internet access. In my mind this is no different than giving children cigarettes or other adult materials. But nobody batted an eye. I'm also not surprised, though. Loads of people here have made tons of money from children having access to the internet.

Unfortunately it's so hard to go back from something like this. So we end up in this stupid situation where people will accept more surveillance because we can't just take phones away from children.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#393
post #372

If you're going to take an aspect of UK law it would be better to take some aspects of the police training: how long they are trained, how to do de escalation, the idea of policing by consent. (I realise UK police are far from perfect).

don't think so, mate

And now, "it's still in the package!"

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#395
post #254

The right people to protect children are those responsible for them - their parents and guardians. If there is a problem with children not being sufficiently protected, that is the level at which to solve it. Give families tools and information to do so.

reads like you’re espousing a theoretical position from a theoretical perspective https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49205469 > you know, i feel like the "it's the parents' responsibility" comments that turn up on submissions like this often tend towards phrasing like " the parents " rather than " with my children i ..." if you’ve had kids maybe you’d like to share with the class exactly how you go about doing exac…

>maybe let parents figure out how to parent

That can only work if parents as an interest group stop bothering the rest of us with the very 'think of the children' nonsense that spawned this thread. If you are inventing laws that affect us, we should also have a say.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#396
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we stop pretending an online porn blocker is the same as AI scanning the photos you take and uploading ones it doesn't like?

This continues to be an absolutely false characterization of what Apple was planning to do, which it was doing BECAUSE IT WANTED TO SUPPORT USER PRIVACY

Um no, Apple didn't scan all your pictures and upload some to Apple because it supported your privacy.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of us survived the internet when it was an even wilder west, IRC chats with strangers trying to learn perl, not putting your name and social security number into random websites. Being aware of predators. It's a very specific kind of power-hungry move fast and break things tech that refuses to accept responsibility of the fallout. Anonymity, the right to move privately and be private online is much bigger than…

I fully appreciate that you care more about anonymity on principle, but it seems very naive to assume that principles are necessarily going to win out over the demands of aggrieved reactionary parents. Cranky parents are very consistent voters and providers of tax revenue in most polities and politicians want them to be reasonably happy and quiescent for the sake of stability. It seems to me you are wildly underestim…

You won't go far by calling everyone you disagree with, cranky, aggrieved, and reactionary. Maybe take some time to understand their concerns and you won't be so surprised when their vote wins.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#398
post #254

The right people to protect children are those responsible for them - their parents and guardians. If there is a problem with children not being sufficiently protected, that is the level at which to solve it. Give families tools and information to do so.

Said parents and guardians cannot protect their kids all the time - they have their own responsibilities like work. Most kids go to school during the day. The few that aren't grow up in homeschooling systems or cult-like environments, which are their own problem.

I frequently see this rhetoric (parents should look after their kids) from naive people on the internet that clearly don't have kids of their own (or don't have teenagers, or don't live or let their kids live free, etc)

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's say I have a business SaaS application, am I banned from showing content in an infinite scroll window? How would I prove my application is targeted for business users and not actually targeting children? Not saying these are impossible questions to answer or get right in a law, just that there are more things to think about than which component you decide to show data inside.

You wouldn't have to prove that you were or weren't targeting children. You'd just have to operate a social media platform and allow infinite scrolling. The law would define a social media platform. Maybe something like: The term “social media platform” means a website or internet medium that— (A) permits a person to become a registered user, establish an account, or create a profile for the purpose of allowing users…

The EU has been pretty successful with rough definitions and "I know it when I see it". The Digital Markets Act just specifies which specific companies are too powerful and need to be regulated, and a process for adding more.

Re: The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

#400
post #254

The right people to protect children are those responsible for them - their parents and guardians. If there is a problem with children not being sufficiently protected, that is the level at which to solve it. Give families tools and information to do so.

No ID checks at clubs, bars, or other adults-only venues. No school zone speed limits, or protected crossings on streets near schools. No requirements for railings on public balconies, fencing around public pools, protective covers over drains or other holes in the ground. Parents/guardians can just supervise. Sounds great!

> No ID checks at clubs, bars, or other adults-only venues.

Those are mostly there because of alcoholic drinks being served and the venue wants to create a certain atmosphere. There are plenty of parents that would take their kids there if they could.

The rest is not just there for kids but also for adults (or elderly).

There is a bunch of adults who would step in a hole in the ground or fall off a balcony.

Post reply on HN