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

Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#891

Post by jasonlotito »

bix6 wrote: post #770
swiftcoder wrote: post #731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure what's a mess about a driver's license, social security card Neither of those are accepted by various states' voter id laws, nor can you reliably board an airplane with them since RealID. The only foolproof identity card in the US appears to be a passport (which, you know, global federal identity card... exactly what the folks against universal ids dislike)

My drivers license is a real id and has been for like 5 years? This is a non issue if you went to the DMV instead of waiting until now.

> This is a non issue if you went to the DMV instead of waiting until now.

This is incorrect. RealID is optional on DLs. Assuming modern DLs are all RealIDs is wrong.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#892

Post by skybrian »

katsura wrote: post #879
skybrian wrote: post #832

I don’t know why this isn’t a very simple Internet standard. The browsers on devices that have a child lock turned on could send an http header. People who have websites that are adult-only could configure their web server to check for that header and do something appropriate. That requires cooperation, but since most adult websites don’t want children to be visiting them, cooperation shouldn’t be hard to get. Govern…

Then predators can show normal content to adults, while children are redirected. I'd rather the browser didn't leak this kind of information.

If the browser has to do the same thing for adults and children (to avoid detection) then it’s going to be hard to build a system that does different things for adults versus children.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#893

Post by stopbulying2 »

Isn't age verification effectively useless given PI breaches?

"Do such breaches make it trivial to lie to age and identity verification systems?"

"1B identity records exposed in ID verification data leak" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47348440#

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#894

Post by chao- »

cortesoft wrote: post #875
gzread wrote: post #860

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Illinois bill prohibits financial transactions, and feeds engineered to be addictive.

How do you define a “feed engineered to be addictive”? How do you distinguish between addictive and just good quality?

This isn't from the bill, but this is what I would like to see: Any endless scroll "feed" can only be chronological content only from people/orgs/entities you opt-in to see ("follow", "subscribe", what-have-you).

Will that be bad for "engagement"?

Yes. That's the point.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#895

Post by bmau5 »

rwmj wrote: post #673
redm wrote: post #654

The question I keep coming back to regarding the recent debate around age verification is "Why now?" I'm 47, and I started using the internet in my early teens through BBS gateways. I've seen every age of the Internet, and there's always been widely available pornographic materials. Why all of a sudden is this a crisis? Perhaps I'm missing something?

Meta likes this stuff because (a) it's a barrier to entry to new social networks and (b) it heads off the under 16 bans which have happened in other countries.

It's also valuable verifiable data for advertisers, in that it verifies real people are being served your ads, and it's going to the desired age range/appropriate audience

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#897

Post by jedberg »

ibejoeb wrote: post #846
cycomanic wrote: post #721

These discussions remind me so much of the US discussions about federal ID documents as verification. There's a vocal portion of people which opposes any solution because "privacy, government overreach, surveillance ...". So instead of a solution like e.g. zero-proof age verification, that tries to minimize intrusions on privacy, the result is the worst of all worlds, maximum surveillance (but I guess it's ok if it i…

When I hear this argument ("better the government do it than a private company") I recoil. The government is sovereign, only accepts lawsuits at its discretion, and can use violence to get its way. We also know for a fact that it abuses its powers and conducts surreptitious unlawful campaigns against its citizens. I'm not on board with any of it, but the last thing I want is the government to control it.

When the government is working as intended, and have not abdicated their duties to the people, the government at least has controls over what they can and cannot do. Yes, they have a monopoly on violence, but they also in theory have lots of controls.

For example, the government cannot silence your speech, but a private company can. The government cannot share your data with others, a private company can.

Unfortunately the government has abdicated their duties and so you think they are worse than a private company.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#898

Post by vouwfietsman »

notatoad wrote: post #884
hedora wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For there to be a solution, there needs to be a problem. These bills are not addressing a problem. Assume the online platform has a video feed of my kid, or their SSN, or a zero-knowledge-proof of age, or whatever. Now, what will the platform do with it? Concretely? As in: Name one bad outcome a reasonable parent would care about that's prohibited under these bills. If the bad thing happens due to willful negligence,…

>Name one bad outcome a reasonable parent would care about that's prohibited under these bills. the bad outcomes don't need to be prohibited under these bills. it's already illegal to, for example, distribute pornography to minors. which i think is something that a reasonable parent would have a problem with. but if there is no way to determine who is a minor and who isn't, then it's impossible to determine the diffe…

> distribute pornography to minors. which i think is something that a reasonable parent would have a problem with.

I'm sorry what?

This is not even close to consensus, as you present it.

Also, a thought exercise, just for you:

1. Should stabbing people be illegal? 2. Should we make it impossible to stab people?

Think about those things, and how they relate to eachother. What would the consequences be of #2?

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#899

Post by ibejoeb »

vrganj wrote: post #853
ibejoeb wrote: post #846

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I hear this argument ("better the government do it than a private company") I recoil. The government is sovereign, only accepts lawsuits at its discretion, and can use violence to get its way. We also know for a fact that it abuses its powers and conducts surreptitious unlawful campaigns against its citizens. I'm not on board with any of it, but the last thing I want is the government to control it.

The government is also, at least theoretically , democratic and accountable to the population. Meta on the other hand is a dictatorship run by Zuck that's only marginally accountable to stockholders (which are only a small subset of the population).

Right. It's theoretical. We have hard proof that it's not, though. The second part is that the government can compel it. I am free to ignore Zuck.

Re: Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act

#900

Post by richrichardsson »

kakacik wrote: post #609
konart wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>same way we handle knives I'm pretty sure most kids older than 12 do have access to kitchen knives. And actively use them too. I generally agree with your point. But at the same time access to the internet resouces and to gun or a chaisaw is not the same. I have no problem securing a few items if my home, but I have no control over whatever is available on the net. Sure, I can write some firewall rules or create "ki…

Even if you did, you just lower the chances. I've created Netflix kids account specifically for mine. On its own it suggests also various documentaries on top of cartoons. We took the first one it suggested, and IIRC in second episode there was a very gruesome and detailed part with polar bear eating baby seals, one chew at a time. One way to traumatize 4-year old, I'd say an effective one.

Netflix age recommendations are a complete joke.

There was one documentary series that apparently appropriate for 7+ and had "motherfucker" within the first 30 seconds of one episode.

I don't know which parallel reality they're from where that is an appropriate word for a 7 year old to learn.

Post reply on HN