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

651–660 of 796 posts

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

#651

Post by pixelatedindex »

qsera wrote: post #308
pixelatedindex wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The statement “These are child safety laws” premises that the laws would save children - so the way to refute is to ask for proof. Outside of vaccines I doubt there is anything concrete that will directly benefit children. There is no argument that holds up to scrutiny. They also don’t have any good way to measure safety, though Goodhart’s Law would have an impact.

>Outside of vaccines Will you allow an argument against this? I mean, I want to show an example where it is only a problem when someone else is not as convinced as yourself, one way or the other. >so the way to refute is to ask for proof.. No use. The same proof will not be convincing for everyone. Let us take vaccine. The proof for a Vaccine for X saving Y lives is often the following. "Before the vaccine there was…

> Are those kids who are not dying of X (thanks to the vaccine), are dying of something else? Now the picture is not so clear.

Why is it not so clear? If they are not dying of X then the vaccine did the job and technically saved the kid’s life from dying of X. Notice that it doesn’t mean that they can’t die of other things.

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

#652

Post by mrtesthah »

littlecorner wrote: post #563
happymellon wrote: post #433

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but the war on anonymity was first (just) passed in the US at a state level as porn laws before it passed in the UK. Are we pretending that the porn id laws weren't a first attempt at getting forums like Reddit that might "accidentally" have naked pictures liable and therefore profile everyone? Because this is leaning on blaming to UK for everything the US is doing to itself an awful lot…

Which states? How much? Were these anomalous events that were overturned, or more systematic? These are honest questions I'm having, not trying to argue any narrative

Basically all the states with Republican-controlled state-houses:

https://action.freespeechcoalition.com/age-verification-reso...

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

#653

Post by Forgeties79 »

antonvs wrote: post #297
Forgeties79 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a feeling we had a similar experience growing up. I generally agree, but also, we got QAnon/Alex Jones and such which have quite directly screwed up my country. So I don’t know, my opinion is often contradictory and fluid. I don’t know where I stand anymore. I believe in an “open internet,” but also, there’s people like Andrew Tate who have ruined the minds of people I care about. We can debate if these system…

[flagged]

I can’t roll my eyes hard enough at you.

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

#654

Post by Steve16384 »

like_any_other wrote: post #582
inigyou wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. The UK "wrongthink arrests" were for stuff like calling for a building full of people to be burned down. While the US arrests you for criticising the police chief.

The UK arrests were also for stickers with: slogans such as “Reject white guilt”, “Nationalism is nurture”, “We will be a minority in our homeland by 2066” and “Diversity – designed to fail, built to replace” - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/16/uk-man-with-... "Stirring up racial hatred", even merely possessing material that could do so, is a crime in the UK: https://www.thelawpages.com/criminal-offence…

Your framing of the stories is interesting: * "UK arrests were also for stickers" - surely there must be a point where we stop someone putting racists stickers everywhere. * "merely possessing materials designed to Stirring up racial hatred" - Presumably you're okay with someone stirring up racial hatred? * "Viewing "far-right propaganda" carries a 15 year jail sentence:" - No it doesn't, that's just an MP trying to get votes. * ""young white girls are being raped by these grooming gangs" ". Where does it say anything about a jail term?

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

#655

Post by mnewme »

qsera wrote: post #308
pixelatedindex wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The statement “These are child safety laws” premises that the laws would save children - so the way to refute is to ask for proof. Outside of vaccines I doubt there is anything concrete that will directly benefit children. There is no argument that holds up to scrutiny. They also don’t have any good way to measure safety, though Goodhart’s Law would have an impact.

>Outside of vaccines Will you allow an argument against this? I mean, I want to show an example where it is only a problem when someone else is not as convinced as yourself, one way or the other. >so the way to refute is to ask for proof.. No use. The same proof will not be convincing for everyone. Let us take vaccine. The proof for a Vaccine for X saving Y lives is often the following. "Before the vaccine there was…

[flagged]

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

#656

Post by Steve16384 »

like_any_other wrote: post #596
inigyou wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ok good. Except for the viewing thing. That one is crazy. Most of what you described is just disinformation though and I'm fine with the UK taking a different approach than the US.

> Most of what you described is just disinformation though “We will be a minority in our homeland by 2066” is accurate: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/white-briton... Burning the Koran is not a statement of fact, so it cannot be disinformation. "young white girls are being raped by these grooming gangs" is also accurate (though the precise number is contentious, mostly because the police turned a bli…

> “We will be a minority in our homeland by 2066” is accurate

Accurate as in someone said it? Centuries ago, people were worried that if the number of horses increased at the current rate, we would be waist-deep in horse manure.

And you admit yourself that the "precise number is contentious".

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

#657

Post by Steve16384 »

joenot443 wrote: post #38
BeaverGoose wrote: post #8

I'm always surprised how defensive people get in here about privacy when so many corporations have vastly more information about you than the government does.

The government has a monopoly on violence and companies do not.

The government employ a lot of private companies to do their dirty work.

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

#658

Post by eks391 »

fn-mote wrote: post #611
jollyllama wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't actually care about children being protected. If they did, who in their right mind would trust the government to pull it off? It's like people who send their kids to public school thinking they're really going to be safe and educated. They're either rolling their dice with the best option they have, knowing there's a significant likelihood of failure, or checking a box. "My kid's in school, I did what I ne…

> It's like people who send their kids to public school thinking they're really going to be safe and educated I really feel like I missed the /s or something. Or possibly the poster went to a much worse public school than I did? (USA public = government funded.) Reducing a challenge like education to a sound bite to win an argument on HN lowers the level of dialog. Also, where I live the majority of people trust the…

I obviously can't speak for everyone, but even when I was in school, I knew (thought) schools primary purpose was to babysit kids and teens so any damage they were doing was in a contained environment. Education was just busy work and safety is definitely a goal but a difficult objective.

When I went to college, I met friends with dramatically different experiences in their schools than I had, and that was the first time the idea that school was more than just a babysitting camp had crossed my mind. My school was safe from exterior threats, and they took the bomb threats and jail breaks very seriously, even holding us in our classrooms late into the day until the perpetrator was caught, but internal threats caused by kids would always outnumber the teachers capacity to thwart. My parents choose where we lived based on the school having the least violence in the area so I know my experience wasn't even on the extreme end.

Edit: I realize I didn't address education. In short, in successful because my mom put a lot of work trying to educate me and ensure I took homework seriously. Even though I hardly attended my classes, I graduated top 10% because submitting homework was all you needed to do to surpass your peers. Any kids whose only educational influence was school itself, at least where I grew up, didn't receive much of an education.

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

#659

Post by codedokode »

someguynamedq wrote: post #641
codedokode wrote: post #480

Here's my idea how "safe mode" might be implemented without selfie, passport and without every app or website owner having to spend money on compliance. The mobile and desktop OS should have a checkbox "child mode" in the onboarding stage. Switching device to "child mode" allows only installing white-listed apps from the government list and opening white-listed websites from the government list. Parents may edit the…

So your idea is that the government determines the list of sites children get to use?

The default list that parent may change but 99% won't bother doing it.

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

#660

Post by codedokode »

inigyou wrote: post #514
codedokode wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the power grab? Everything is voluntary except for the requirement to support child mode.

Probably the government list. That part is a bad idea. It can be reactive instead, allow anyone to declare their site is child-safe and then punish false declarations.

The problem is that you cannot punish foreign websites, and there definitely will be ones allowing to bypass restrictions.
Post reply on HN