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

The UK's war on anonymity has come to America

effort.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 806 posts

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

#401

Post by Cthulhu_ »

dijksterhuis wrote: post #377
chr15m wrote: 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…

> phrasing like "the parents" rather than "with my children i ..."

I need to remember this one, thanks!

The only way parents can try to protect their kids from the world is to keep them isolated, homeschooled, or in some kind of commune or cult. Which unfortunately is not uncommon in the US.

> let parents figure out how to parent

While I agree, I also think there's a role in society to help parents on how to parent, via e.g. education and awareness. Every generation brings new unknowns, like what kids can do in Roblox or how they can browse the internet on their smart fridge, and it's unreasonable to assume every parent knows all of that.

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

#402

Post by inigyou »

tangotaylor wrote: post #223

> A joint statement by Buffy Wicks, the lead author of AB 2273, Jordan Cunningham, another AB 2273 author, and 5Rights Foundation states, “The Bill is practicable and realistic, drawing as it does on the UK’s Age Appropriate Design Code (AADC).” How is Buffy Wicks so damn gullible with tech legislation? Her AB 1043 and AB 1856 (Digital Age Assurance Act), intended to protect children online and regulate Big Tech (but…

The DAAA doesn't criminalize open source. Please stop spreading disinformation.

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

#403

Post by inigyou »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #339
tangotaylor wrote: post #223

> A joint statement by Buffy Wicks, the lead author of AB 2273, Jordan Cunningham, another AB 2273 author, and 5Rights Foundation states, “The Bill is practicable and realistic, drawing as it does on the UK’s Age Appropriate Design Code (AADC).” How is Buffy Wicks so damn gullible with tech legislation? Her AB 1043 and AB 1856 (Digital Age Assurance Act), intended to protect children online and regulate Big Tech (but…

Well-respected by who? >(but unintentionally criminalizing open source) Why do you assume this was unintentional? Because she said so?

Why do you assume it actually happened? The DAAA doesn't criminalize open source.

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

#404

Post by inigyou »

trashb wrote: post #400
ytoawwhra92 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So why are ID checks necessary at venues that serve alcoholic drinks in particular, out of all the venues that exist?

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

#405

Post by inigyou »

zmmmmm wrote: post #276
chr15m wrote: 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.

the weird thing about it all is that age is a bad proxy in the first place for a child's level of safety in interacting with online content. Some kids are super mature at 11 and others still need protection at 16. For some reason the world has fixated on "years alive" as a perfect measure of vulnerability and now are doggedly pursuing it. Even if perfect age verification is implemented, kids will be harmed. Because t…

Under the DAAA the parent can just lie about the child's age in the settings.

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

#406

Post by red_admiral »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #3

> These NGOs have converged upon a unified strategy: use the rhetoric of ‘child safety’ to advocate for digital ID laws that would prevent adults from using the internet anonymously. Of course. Anyone who brings up kids is trying to manipulate you into giving up your freedom for security. Whatever argument they make should be simply ignored and dismissed.

> Anyone who brings up kids is trying to manipulate you into giving up your freedom for security

That argument loses you most of the population in a vote, myself included. Parents may disagree, for a start; I reckon most women (especially outside of tech) read that and mark you down as "creepy man I don't want near kids".

It's also wrong, as there are lots of rules that are in fact designed to protect children. I recommend reading up on the history of child abuse in the Boy Scouts of America (now Scouts BSA), FBI agent Kenneth Lanning's investigation, and the safeguarding and leadership training that scout leaders must take today.

The UK has a system, I think it's called the DBS, which depending on the level of check ranges from "is this person a convicted sex offender?" to "non-crime hate incidents". One can argue a lot about what the correct level should be, no-one has yet convincingly explained to me why specifically "non-crime" actions should be in a secret police record. But I am on board with someone convicted by a court for child sex offences not being allowed to become a schoolteacher.

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

#407

Post by Cthulhu_ »

zmmmmm wrote: post #276
chr15m wrote: 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.

the weird thing about it all is that age is a bad proxy in the first place for a child's level of safety in interacting with online content. Some kids are super mature at 11 and others still need protection at 16. For some reason the world has fixated on "years alive" as a perfect measure of vulnerability and now are doggedly pursuing it. Even if perfect age verification is implemented, kids will be harmed. Because t…

Arguably, all online content should be moderated - just because I'm 40 doesn't mean I want to come across decapitations and the like.

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

#408

Post by Cthulhu_ »

freakynit wrote: post #369
commanderj wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I feed stupid to ask, but what does the graph tell us in that particular case?

"Connections"... how most important personnel from 5rights are associated with other entities (people, org, events, etc), that can directly, or indirectly, connect to political circle... thus, act as political influence network...

Very nice, this is what investigative journalism should be doing as well, but if it's "democratized" by just putting it up on a website we don't need to wait for anyone to publish it.

As long as all the sources are listed and verifiable, of course.

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

#409

Post by inigyou »

b112 wrote: post #345
ElProlactin wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the large majority of the population in Vietnam, including in the North, wanted the US to defeat the Vietcong and the Soviets. The 1954 Geneva Accords, which ended the French war, called for nationwide reunification elections by July 1956. Those elections never happened. Ngo Dinh Diem, the US-backed first president of South Vietnam who was a brutal authoritarian, refused to hold them. The US backed his refusal and…

The large majority of the population in Vietnam, in both the North and the South, didn't want a foreign power controlling their country and determining their fate. They wanted to run their own country, and have peace. And yet, the poster you're replying to said no such thing . Not even close. They merely said they wanted help repelling an enemy. You're also using hindsight to frame this conflict, something entirely u…

Have you really backslid from "modern militaries don't rape and pillage" to "modern militaries rape and pillage, but it doesn't count because it's illegal"?

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

#410

Post by Cthulhu_ »

switchbak wrote: post #136
walrus01 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or guarantee that even if you provide such data to a nice, friendly, democratically run and ethically managed administration, that some future regime change to a completely different group of people won't result in catastrophic misuse.

This is the issue I have with most of my well meaning but somewhat politically uninformed friends. The idea of “wouldn’t it be good if …” (idealized scenario), is never followed up with a “yes, but …” (realistic evaluation of how politics actually works). Yes it might actually work out ok if a mythical benevolent dictator could manage things with infinite precision and unlimited compassion. I would imagine that has n…

> Yes it might actually work out ok if a mythical benevolent dictator could manage things with infinite precision and unlimited compassion. I would imagine that has never happened at any reasonable scale.

That's because people aren't recognizing me as their benevolent god-emperor yet.

Post reply on HN