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

921–930 of 1001 posts

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

#921

Post by _heimdall »

megous wrote: post #837
_heimdall wrote: post #807

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That requires a high level of trust in your current government and whomever is in charge in the future. Its worth remembering how the Nazis so efficiently found Jews in the Netherlands. The Dutch government kept meticulous records, including things like your name, address, and religious affiliation. That wasn't a big deal until the Nazis rolled in, throw in some level of Nazi sympathizers in the Dutch government and…

That's an argument against any mass collection/concentration of data in anyone's hands. Not against gov. collection of data in particular.

Sure, there's a good reason to avoid centralizing data in general but in this case we're talking about governments. Governments are particularly dangerous for mass data collection because they also come with the authority, and military, of a state.

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

#922

Post by _heimdall »

mapcars wrote: post #839
_heimdall wrote: post #807

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That requires a high level of trust in your current government and whomever is in charge in the future. Its worth remembering how the Nazis so efficiently found Jews in the Netherlands. The Dutch government kept meticulous records, including things like your name, address, and religious affiliation. That wasn't a big deal until the Nazis rolled in, throw in some level of Nazi sympathizers in the Dutch government and…

> That requires a high level of trust in your current government and whomever is in charge in the future. Some entity has to be trusted with our data anyway, at least government supposed to have some accountability before the citizens, corporations have much higher incentives for profit.

Why is it a given that we need to trust an entity with our data? Most of human history got by without data collection, centralized or otherwise, there's no innate law of nature requiring it

It doesn't require only trusting the government (or another corporation) today, it requires trusting all future iterations of them as well. It may be a different story if the data was periodically purged, say after each administration for example.

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

#923

Post by xvector »

Quarrelsome wrote: post #905
xvector wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blocking this is the responsibility of a parent. Spend some time to configure parental controls etc. Pushing to turn society into a police state because parents are too tired/lazy/tech-illiterate is simply not the solution

> Blocking this is the responsibility of a parent. Spend some time to configure parental controls etc. sure but the bar is low for a reason. On top of that, we're discriminating against people born to bad parents by leaving them vulnerable, arguably furthering inequality. I don't think anything is necessarily out of scope in terms of the solution, what matters is identifying the issue (i.e. the intentionally addictiv…

Edge cases where people are born to bad parents are not a reason to give up our freedom and rights

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

#924

Post by genewitch »

47282847 wrote: post #916
mothballed wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kids are not property of the parents. Because with property rights comes responsibility. And that's the catch-22 imposed on parents. Society wants to lord over the power as if the child is their property but none of the responsibility. Anything that went wrong is the parent's fault. It's always more and more requirements upon the parent, a nearly one way imposition of power where law or society says what you must do…

> Because with property rights comes responsibility Response-ability. The ability to respond. Which you have, if you want it or not, for anything and everything you can respond to. You see children on the streets getting beat up? Your response-ability. You see someone throwing garbage to the ground? Your response-ability. What you DO with it, whether you act on it, or you deny to have it, doesn’t matter. It is purely…

responsibility:

> "fact or condition of being responsible, accountable, or answerable," from 1780s.

and in the mid 1790s it meant "that for which one is responsible; a trust, duty, etc."

i am not sure where you're getting this "ability to respond" idea from. i understand the ideal, it just won't work with humans, unless we go back to being tribal.

The key point in the etymology is "that for which one is responsible" you have to actually be responsible for some "thing" to have any responsibility.

even "Response" comes from re- + Sponsor, which:

> The general sense of "one who binds himself to answer for another and be responsible for his conduct" is by 1670s.

i am not bound by anyone else on this planet, thanks very much.

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

#925

Post by otterley »

5upplied_demand wrote: post #827
hattmall wrote: post #772

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, it's not required to vote. It's required for a new registration to vote. Which is typically done when you get a new ID, which already requires having those documents, more even because you have to show proof of current residence.

So there is no problem to solve?

What do you think the problem to solve is? Please use quantitative data in your answer.

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

#926

Post by ibejoeb »

vrganj wrote: post #920
ibejoeb wrote: post #906

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get all of these hypotheticals, but, again, we know that it's not true. The government routinely collects and shares information that it shouldn't. We can't talk about it like it doesn't because it was designed not to. We have to contend with reality.

But we also know that Meta routinely collects and shares information that it shouldn't. At least the government shouldn't on a theoretical level?

I don't understand the fascination with pretending. System A is bad. System B is worse. System B theoretically shouldn't exist yet it does and there's nothing you can do about it, so now you're advocating for B. What's the rationale?

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

#927

Post by _heimdall »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #885
ori_b wrote: post #862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some entity has to be trusted with our data anyway Why?

Because the government needs to know who you are to do anything involving you. Taxes, drivers' licenses, passports, courts, etc.

There are still a lot of underlying assumptions here worth noting though. You're assuming we must have a government and what it must be able to do, like charge me taxes or gatekeep certain activities behind licensing systems.

I'm not arguing we don't need a government. But to silently take for granted that everything from income taxes to public roads and travel restrictions are a given jumps ahead here.

We could decide, for example, that the government shouldn't be allowed to centralize certain data and remove some of what we expect them to do instead.

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

#928

Post by TeMPOraL »

NegativeLatency wrote: post #909
Xelbair wrote: post #869

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because this does not address the problem at all. Or rather - it does not address my problems as a citizen, and it just pushes responsibility of parents onto 3rd parties and punishes everyone collectively for it. Also fundamentally speaking - this does just take away your right to privacy. do you just let your rights be taken away? I don't want 'minimization' of intrusion of privacy, i want no intrusion of privacy.

It’s the classic American route of attempting a technical solution to a societal problem.

Technology is what solutions are made of. The "nontechnical solutions to societal problems" are the things like "wishful thinking", "pretending the problem doesn't exist", "wishing it away", etc.

(Which is fine when the problem is bullshit and there is nothing to solve, which actually may be the case here.)

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

#929

Post by ibejoeb »

conartist6 wrote: post #591

The way the law is written is so utterly shit that I don't think it does what it's meant to do at all . Microsoft has a trillion dollars in liability now because every historical OS is illegal, and every adult user of that historical OS (that you don't ask for their age) is a monetary fine. $2500 fine for Microsoft for letting me continue use Windows 10 in Colorado, cause they never asked my age. Also hilariously the…

Microsoft is not going to let you continue using Windows 10 under any circumstances.

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

#930

Post by katsura »

skybrian wrote: post #892
katsura wrote: post #879

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

As you suggested, the websites could send information about themselves and the browser then could decide locally. Then there is no data leak. Obviously not perfect, because just like how the cookie law is abused, people could abuse this system as well. But the browser passing around headers is not the solution.
Post reply on HN