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

471–480 of 486 posts

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#471

Post by Ajedi32 »

popcornricecake wrote: post #414
skybrian wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is that society should have some common standards for what's inappropriate for children. For example, parents don't want their kids to buy cigarettes, but also, stores don't want to sell them cigarettes. When there's consensus on this, cooperation is possible. Parents have an easier time when they get cooperation from the rest of society. But there isn't going to be consensus on everything, so content filter…

It's the internet. There are no borders and there is no mandate to follow any consensus. Stores may not want to sell cigarettes to children, but e-stores safely hosted in some remote country do want to sell them nicotine pouches and vapes. With a protocol that makes age information always available to websites they could hide their intentions from adults while actively targeting children.

IMO you could have some mechanism by which websites could have content certified as child-safe if they agree to adhere to certain standards. (And thereby make them accessible to child-safe devices, which would otherwise default to blocking content which doesn't bear such a certificate.) Adult devices would not implement those restrictions and would therefore be unaffected.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#472

Post by [deleted] »

iamnothere wrote: post #334
skybrian wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is that society should have some common standards for what's inappropriate for children. For example, parents don't want their kids to buy cigarettes, but also, stores don't want to sell them cigarettes. When there's consensus on this, cooperation is possible. Parents have an easier time when they get cooperation from the rest of society. But there isn't going to be consensus on everything, so content filter…

So simple, just get various Christian, Muslim, atheist, traditionalist and progressive, sane and insane parents to all agree on a common set of what is appropriate and inappropriate. And then enforce that on all of their children. Why didn’t I think of that? That should go great .

[deleted]

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#473

Post by Ajedi32 »

yalogin wrote: post #102

The big issue isn’t even age verification. The end goal is verified user identification. They want every transaction on the internet to be associated with the exact identity of the user. No more anonymity. In the short term the way it will be implemented is this — age verification will not be a binary, it will also want to push your DoB, name, location etc and they say “the choice is with the user” but the default wi…

Personally I think this is untrue, and that acting like it's true is a defeatist attitude that sabotages any efforts to build alternative systems that accomplish the goal of age verification without user verification.

Right now my personal preference would be a standard for web services certifying content as "kid friendly" combined with a standard for "kid friendly" devices that block uncertified content by default. This would accomplish the alleged goal of blocking children from accessing adult content without infringing on the rights of adults.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#474

Post by Gormo »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #473
yalogin wrote: post #102

The big issue isn’t even age verification. The end goal is verified user identification. They want every transaction on the internet to be associated with the exact identity of the user. No more anonymity. In the short term the way it will be implemented is this — age verification will not be a binary, it will also want to push your DoB, name, location etc and they say “the choice is with the user” but the default wi…

Personally I think this is untrue, and that acting like it's true is a defeatist attitude that sabotages any efforts to build alternative systems that accomplish the goal of age verification without user verification. Right now my personal preference would be a standard for web services certifying content as "kid friendly" combined with a standard for "kid friendly" devices that block uncertified content by default.…

> Personally I think this is untrue, and that acting like it's true is a defeatist attitude that sabotages any efforts to build alternative systems that accomplish the goal of age verification without user verification.

It may well be true, and worrying about the possibility that it is is what should motivate people to build alternatives/workarounds.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#475

Post by SR2Z »

gruez wrote: post #303
BobbyJo wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens when everyone needs to use AI for their job? Genuine question that I think gets at the heart of the debate. Once a common technology that everyone has access to becomes powerful enough to alter the lives of others on command, do we as a society just need to do away with the concept of anonymity? We are all just too powerful in isolation, and too much of a threat to the collective, that we cannot reasonab…

>What happens when everyone needs to use AI for their job? Genuine question that I think gets at the heart of the debate. Considering most places does direct deposit and that requires a bank account (so KYC), I don't see what's particularly new here. Many places also do background and/or work eligibility checks, which again is a form of KYC. >Today, you can buy parts/print a completely untraceable firearm, so do we l…

> Fortunately 3d printed guns are bad enough that it's not really an issue

It does actually seem like they are an issue - the technology has now been used in several high profile murders and police are reporting seizing them pretty regularly.

I don't think that justifies taking away the freedom to 3D print, but the truth is that if you're committing a crime there are a lot of advantages to a dirt-cheap untraceable nonferrous gun even if it only lasts a few shots.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#476

Post by butlike »

k33n wrote: post #198

We had a good run when the internet was a disruptive force. But mass adoption of anything always leads to where we are. The internet is an established institution. The wild west days are over. If you're looking for that vibe, p2p technology in small corners will be where you can find it.

It's never a disruption. It's just a reimplementation of an existing thing. Disruption is just synonymous with you wanting a piece of the pie.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#477

Post by panzi »

gzread wrote: post #221
txrx0000 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's even better. Make apps and websites provide an API that broadcasts the age rating of its content, then let the OS attest the apps and websites, not the other way around. edit: on second thought, there is a trap here. If hardware manufacturers lock down the bootloader, then we're basically still handing over parental authority to governments and companies in the long run. So I think for a start, we just im…

How would you make a website that can be over 18 or not, such as a social media feed? Would it become over 18 as soon as your following list contains a porn star (who may not have been one at the time you followed them), and then if you're under 18 you can't unfollow them because you can't load the page?

More and more countries want to make social media >18, or at least >16 or something. :/

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#478

Post by Ajedi32 »

Gormo wrote: post #474
Ajedi32 wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think this is untrue, and that acting like it's true is a defeatist attitude that sabotages any efforts to build alternative systems that accomplish the goal of age verification without user verification. Right now my personal preference would be a standard for web services certifying content as "kid friendly" combined with a standard for "kid friendly" devices that block uncertified content by default.…

> Personally I think this is untrue, and that acting like it's true is a defeatist attitude that sabotages any efforts to build alternative systems that accomplish the goal of age verification without user verification. It may well be true, and worrying about the possibility that it is is what should motivate people to build alternatives/workarounds.

I guess my point is that if any substantial portion of the people in favor of age verification are actually acting in good faith, then responding to their efforts to protect children with "NEVER! I WILL OPPOSE YOU TO MY LAST BREATH!" isn't really helping your cause.

Find a way to accomplish the stated goal in a way that doesn't erode our rights, and you'll win a lot more people over.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#479

Post by Gormo »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #478
Gormo wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally I think this is untrue, and that acting like it's true is a defeatist attitude that sabotages any efforts to build alternative systems that accomplish the goal of age verification without user verification. It may well be true, and worrying about the possibility that it is is what should motivate people to build alternatives/workarounds.

I guess my point is that if any substantial portion of the people in favor of age verification are actually acting in good faith, then responding to their efforts to protect children with "NEVER! I WILL OPPOSE YOU TO MY LAST BREATH!" isn't really helping your cause. Find a way to accomplish the stated goal in a way that doesn't erode our rights, and you'll win a lot more people over.

Well, you do have to draw the line somewhere when up against opponents pursuing a salami-slicing strategy. If you keep compromising on incremental measures, you ultimately do lose everything.

Re: Do Not Turn Child Protection into Internet Access Control

#480

Post by Ajedi32 »

Gormo wrote: post #479
Ajedi32 wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess my point is that if any substantial portion of the people in favor of age verification are actually acting in good faith, then responding to their efforts to protect children with "NEVER! I WILL OPPOSE YOU TO MY LAST BREATH!" isn't really helping your cause. Find a way to accomplish the stated goal in a way that doesn't erode our rights, and you'll win a lot more people over.

Well, you do have to draw the line somewhere when up against opponents pursuing a salami-slicing strategy. If you keep compromising on incremental measures, you ultimately do lose everything.

True, but I don't think you need to compromise to do age verification; there are plenty of ways to achieve the stated goal without any privacy impact, like the one I just suggested.

Once people start arguing those measures aren't good enough and that you need to start sacrificing some of your rights in order to keep kids safe, then your position will look a lot more reasonable to moderates when you push back.

Post reply on HN