[deleted]
Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
61–70 of 186 posts
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
He was right to be acquitted, the cops were doing drive by shootings from unmarked vans (using non-lethal bullets but hard to tell when being shot at in the night).
He was acquitted in Minnesota under a very similar fact-pattern of what was happening in Minneapolis during the ICE fiasco: masked men in unmarked cars, often using unlawful force, essentially undifferentiated from thugs, going off and shooting people like goode.
That is what I'm trying to get people to understand.
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#63In my ideal world a law would: 1. Require device manufacturers to allow the device owner (which covers parents of minors' devices) to set policy for the device, including allow/blocklist for apps and sites, and allow/blocklists for content categories. 2. Require browsers to respect the device's policy for site allow/blocklist 3. Require browsers to set a certain header for allow/blocklist of content categories 4. Req…
Parental controls have been built into Apple devices forever. Is that not the case for Android and Windows?
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#64In my ideal world a law would: 1. Require device manufacturers to allow the device owner (which covers parents of minors' devices) to set policy for the device, including allow/blocklist for apps and sites, and allow/blocklists for content categories. 2. Require browsers to respect the device's policy for site allow/blocklist 3. Require browsers to set a certain header for allow/blocklist of content categories 4. Req…
I think it's a great proposal if we add a slight alteration. Rather than requiring parents to maintain block/allow lists, the OS should allow the parent to lock in a birth-date, and that birth-date is used by the system to generate a user-age header, from there, websites can be legally required to respect the header and maintain whatever restrictions correspond to the applicable laws. This gives sites the ability to…
So let me tell you a story.
There are plenty of states including the one I live in where you are required to verify your age to visit porn sites.
If you add up all of the sites that are not hosted in the US and combine them with all of the sites that you can get around the age verification just by using a VPN, would you be surprised if I told you that the total is 100% with most just ignoring the law?
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can children buy guns in AZ? Look, I don't have an opinion here one way or the other, this almost certainly won't pass, but please at least try to argue in good faith.
Adults can buy a gun with no ID, no problem in AZ, fully legal. If you prefer that comparison, to an adult being carded to buy an app. I do feel I was making a good faith comment here. --------- re: below due to throttling --------------- >Adults can sell each other property with no ID and without the state getting involved, who knew. Yes and it's legal. Should be for apps too. Headline says all apps. ---------------…
> Adults can buy a gun with no ID, no problem in AZ
How do they pass the federal background check?
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#66In my ideal world a law would: 1. Require device manufacturers to allow the device owner (which covers parents of minors' devices) to set policy for the device, including allow/blocklist for apps and sites, and allow/blocklists for content categories. 2. Require browsers to respect the device's policy for site allow/blocklist 3. Require browsers to set a certain header for allow/blocklist of content categories 4. Req…
It's not implemented like that because the true goal of these laws has nothing to do with protecting children or age verification, and instead have everything to do with completely eliminating anonymity/pseudo-anonymity online. They want to ID everyone, and have all user generated content attributed to a known, identified individual.
I think it's mostly easy to identify anyone if you actually want to - if you buy anything online you are 100% identifiable for example.
Given the pros/cons in context, I think I'm in favor of it for social media, at least. I'd actually argue you would want to go further and you should have your full address, employer, and more available online. LinkedIn is a cesspool of awful salespeople, but you know what it's not? A massive Russian/Chinese/Maga disinformation site. Maybe you should think twice before saying something online you wouldn't say while standing in front of your house or at work.
Anonymity on social media has brought a lot of problems and I'm not sure what the benefits are. Some point to a small percentage of folks who would be "outed" but, given that the alternative seems to be an emerging dystopia of bots, malicious actors, propaganda, and more, maybe actual transparency is better even taking into account potential harmful effects.
I'm open-minded on this and see pros/cons either way. Though I think if you find yourself worried about this stuff you can just delete your accounts and move on with your life. Trust me you aren't missing out on anything.
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
The biggest issue is, of course, (4) - how do you plan on enforcing that for sites that don't run out of your country of residence? Implicitly restrict access to only those sites in said country?
You don't enforce that, the owner (or the owner's parents, etc) of the device set that policy. MDMs can all already do this, there just needs to be a more user-friendly/consumer focused MDM to allow parents to control their kids devices. Just have it warn "Out of country sites may not follow your device policy, do you want to block them (Y/n)?"
It’s called “Parental Controls” you don’t need an MDM to do it.
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's right wing censorship plain and simple. Unfashionable to state this.
which 'wing' cheered loudly when every platform openly suppressed their political opponents during the last decade, and frothed in impotent rage when one of those platforms unexpectedly changed hands and ceased the censorship? somehow, censorship is only bad when the wrong side does it. when the correct side does it, it's justified and necessary for your democracies to survive.
[deleted]
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#69Curious, what is driving this "you need permission to use the internet" bills suddenly ? Really miss the old internet.
As I recently observed [1], there is a lot more of this sort of coordination than people realize. I personally know of about three groups trying to get some cross-state initiatives implemented at the state level, and I'm not even particularly looking for such things.
It is not a coincidence. It means there is some organization out there pushing these. In general, "organization" here applies very broadly; there are some cases where it pretty much is just more-or-less normal people who organize to get something done. I wouldn't expect this particular thing is that for a second, of course. I'm just saying in general the term applies broadly. Someone is organized and trying to push this.
Re: Arizona Bill Requires Age Verification for All Apps
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Require browsers to respect the device's policy for site allow/blocklist But then HN would still riot, because you would need to require all apps to be approved by a central authority (no unauthorized browsers) OR you need to lock down browser engines to those that respect the list somehow (maybe by killing JIT, limiting network connections). I've learned long ago, as have politicians, there is zero solution that m…
> But then HN would still riot, because you would need to require all apps to be approved by a central authority (no unauthorized browsers) OR you need to lock down browser engines to those that respect the list somehow (maybe by killing JIT, limiting network connections). I don't think you need to do that. You can pass a law without creating a technical mechanism that automatically enforces the law. The law doesn't…
Right, I assure you that no kid who wants to smoke weed or cigarette have any trouble finding it and isn’t saying “I was going to smoke weed/cigarettes but since it’s illegal, I guess I won’t”.
See also in the 1980s Nancy Reagan: “Don’t sniff glue to get high”, Kids: “You can sniff glue and get high!”