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

The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 112 posts

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#71

Post by HNisCIS »

Cider9986 wrote: post #66
HNisCIS wrote: post #3

Will this finally get Signal to stop demanding phone numbers to register accounts? Lots of services you'd rather have an anonymous account with (Google, Meta, Discord) are partially/fully mandating phone numbers as a spam mitigation strategy. Also this paves the way to internet connections/mobile internet requiring ID

Signal's requirement for phone numbers has allowed it to surge in popularity by allowing it to take advantage of people's already established contacts. They do this in a privacy respecting way[1]. Simultaneously, Signal is trying to raise the cost of accounts by requiring phone numbers. Although spammers can get mass amounts of phone numbers, it will at least raise the cost. Email 0 cents, phone # 10 cents–there will…

That's all nice but it's also the defacto option for non technical people who need state actor resistant security and if they can just be subpoenaed to get the verified ID of the account holder that defeats the entire use case

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#72

Post by Cider9986 »

HNisCIS wrote: post #71
Cider9986 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal's requirement for phone numbers has allowed it to surge in popularity by allowing it to take advantage of people's already established contacts. They do this in a privacy respecting way[1]. Simultaneously, Signal is trying to raise the cost of accounts by requiring phone numbers. Although spammers can get mass amounts of phone numbers, it will at least raise the cost. Email 0 cents, phone # 10 cents–there will…

That's all nice but it's also the defacto option for non technical people who need state actor resistant security and if they can just be subpoenaed to get the verified ID of the account holder that defeats the entire use case

Signal is not an anonymity tool–it is a privacy tool. It is not anonymous in any way. If you need anonymity you should use SimpleX over Tor.

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#73

Post by PokedBear »

aspbee555 wrote: post #41

spam/phishing/malicious calls do not come from individuals. How about they start with preventing caller ID spoofing/requiring proper caller ID? the spam calls come from call farms that rotate numbers. they should be required to present a unified and verifiable caller ID Phone systems can put whatever they want in caller ID, there should be verifiable reverse lookup to a valid registered number along with fines for vi…

Business PBX folks really like being able to forward calls off to a cell phone while preserving the original caller's caller ID. And making that work requires allowing arbitrary spoofing. There is some work being done to append the stir/shaken signature from the original caller in a different sip header so the call can still be traced, but ultimately caller id is just too limited of a data framework to relay all the info.

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#74

Post by iamnothere »

han1 wrote: post #14
big85 wrote: post #13

This is part of the same trend which requires ID to use social media, view adult content, or log into their own computer. The goal is to give government control of computers and communications.

China has had the requirement to "bind" online accounts to ID for almost a decade. No one complained because they already verified with Weixin (WeChat) so they just linked their accounts to it.

I doubt “no one complained” is accurate, but the people of China as a whole have seemingly accepted it, and it’s their right to determine how their nation will function. Their willingness to accept it likely comes from their unique history and the current government’s progress in stamping out poverty, improving infrastructure, etc.

In the West we are declining. Implementing these kinds of control measures here looks like a power grab and an attempt to prepare the ground for war measures (information control and censorship). I don’t want this and nobody that I know IRL wants this. People know they are slowly being herded towards their death but nobody knows what to do about it.

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#75

Post by iamnothere »

mattmaroon wrote: post #45
2ndorderthought wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They know through indirect means. So they buy all the cellphone data specifically the gps location data in the us and funnel it through huge servers. So they can determine patterns, addresses, etc. This makes that easier and doesn't risk any of the legality if their should be illegal data sources or other likely illegal activities. Tldr: This is a way to defeat vpns.

Yeah I strongly suspect this will allow them to use it in court considerably more frequently. But still, I know they know who I am. Anyone with a cell phone in their pocket has no privacy. It’s the best tracking device ever. Anyone who thinks anything at all can make that problem worse simply doesn’t understand that they have none. I’d rather have zero privacy and zero spam calls than zero privacy and lots of spam ca…

> I’d rather have zero privacy and zero spam calls than zero privacy and lots of spam calls. Obviously I’d prefer privacy and I think we need a constitutional amendment to that effect, but as far as showing our ID to eliminate spam in a world where zero privacy exists, sign me up.

Thanks for demonstrating that the end goal of privacy doomerism is passive acceptance.

Whether this is your real opinion or you’re astroturfing, you are complicit, and we are judging you.

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#76

Post by iamnothere »

trollbridge wrote: post #27
varispeed wrote: post #2

Domestic abusers rejoice. Just hide the victim's ID and they won't get a phone.

My state has laws specifically about this which help DV victims replace stolen wallets, birth certificates, IDs, and so on. Whether we like it or not, ID is required to function in society these days. The public has, in general, decided they don't like the alternatives, and I would count myself among those who would prefer to have working phone service again without endless junk calls versus the hypothetical ability…

> I would count myself among those who would prefer to have working phone service again without endless junk calls versus the hypothetical ability to go get a phone without ID.

And I would count you among the people who shouldn’t have a say in how these laws affect our right to privacy.

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#77

Post by iamnothere »

jen20 wrote: post #60
simoncion wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. This USian has reliable access to the following without presenting ID * Telephone service * Internet service * A rental apartment to live in and relevant utilities * Food * Clothing * Entertainment * Medical care * A bank account It has been so long that I can no longer clearly remember, but I think that I didn't have to present ID to get my job and get paid. Maybe things are way worse over in Euroland? Or mayb…

How did you rent an apartment without ID? Every time I’ve done that they wanted an SSN, a credit check, and the pledge that your first born would be named after whatever dipshit was in the office that day. You absolutely cannot get a bank account without an ID either: KYC is a thing. Finally, you must complete an I9 form for any new job, which requires (wait for it) an ID.

Maybe rent from individuals instead of corporate landlords. There’s no law against it.

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#78

Post by iamnothere »

vednig wrote: post #29

every thing happening right now in privacy space including OS level ID verification, then websites requiring ID and now this is strangely alarming right to privacy and speech will soon be very limited in aspects only relating and possible offline and very soon there will be nothing one can do about that

It’s not strangely alarming, it is obviously alarming and for good reason.

Take this seriously and get prepared. It’s not a drill, and it’s not something that the next administration is going to roll back, whoever ends up winning. You can’t vote your way out of this.

In the future, privacy and tech sovereignty will be a strictly offline affair.

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#79

Post by tzs »

trollbridge wrote: post #26
panny wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, but you're telling me kids that don't have a government ID can't have phones now, right?

Kids can get government IDs. In my state, it's free for anyone under the age of 17. It's also free for anyone who can provide adequate proof they can't afford the $15.

What about people who can't afford the costs to get the documentation required in order to get the ID?

Re: The FCC wants your ID before you get a phone number

#80

Post by tzs »

trollbridge wrote: post #27
varispeed wrote: post #2

Domestic abusers rejoice. Just hide the victim's ID and they won't get a phone.

My state has laws specifically about this which help DV victims replace stolen wallets, birth certificates, IDs, and so on. Whether we like it or not, ID is required to function in society these days. The public has, in general, decided they don't like the alternatives, and I would count myself among those who would prefer to have working phone service again without endless junk calls versus the hypothetical ability…

> Whether we like it or not, ID is required to function in society these days.

Not in the US. See this thread [1].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47911619

Post reply on HN