THiel’s palinitir, he has been in the news ALOT lately talking about surveillance with his palinitir AI, plus its already being used by LEO. normally you never hear about THIEL that much in the news, because hes pretty “news adverse” person, if hes doing this, hes desperate.
even his boy-toy that get defenestrated in 2024 in florida, barely made the news
There is a (conspiracy) theory that Meta lobbies this shit in order to avoid having to verify the users’ age and not being culpable in case a minor uses their service.
People responding to this are right about their actual intentions, but yeah. I think if you wanted to go about doing this the right way it would be an “I’m an adult” or a “this device is primarily used by a child” checkmark that could be locked down behind an administrative password.
That’s it. That’s all you really need if your intention was actually just makeing sure kids couldn’t wander into a part of the internet not made for them. Everything else, verification, that’s just surveillance bullshit being bolted on top.
But that is effectively what this bill does, just rather than a check box it is a date entry. There is no verification requirement. Only indication (attestation).
Respectfully I disagree. What I’m describing here is a checkmark. It’s a flag that gets turned on presumably by a parent and turned off presumably when the kid comes of age or gets their own computer or whatever. There is no date attached. There’s no personally identifiable information that your operating system is collecting and distributeing without your knowledge. At worst it’d allow people to be sorted into above and below certain ages, that’s it.
I get that what’s being proposed does not require verification (for now, way things are going I don’t necessarily expect that to stick). But even if your assuming good intent on the part of these law makers and corporations I still believe entering a date is too much of an invasion of privacy. If this is something we have to do (which I don’t believe it is but idiots seem to be forcing the issue) then it should be done with the least amout of data possible. That means a yea or nay on a binary checkbox.
I’m aware, I just think the bracket is too much information. Besides, laws can be changed and increasingly laws are broken with zero repercussions. What is to stop Microsoft from not “transmitting” the information yet still using it internally for targeted advertising? Honestly the raw date of birth isn’t even needed for that. An age bracket would do fine and as far as I’m aware there are zero restrictions on Microsoft using that.
No, if your actually only interested in protecting kids, I think this is vast overkill. This is a mesure for surveillance and advertising and I think age brackets are more than sufficient for accomplishing that.
They want to require IDs which requires validation, which requires a central authority. Any websites you hit that require the check will request it from the OS which will need to verify with central authority. So they’ll know what websites your hitting.
Dynamic IPs still have an ID associated. VPNs most can be subpoena for the true IP. Yes you can hide your IP but only a tiny fraction are doing that work and this law isnt going to affect them.
Yup, the REAL goal here is to get an ID associated with an IP address to remove your anonymity from the web.
Maybe I’m I don’t have enough of a technical understanding (and I’m wrong about this) but I believe there is some sort of fingerprint at the OS level (not IP or Mac) that they can obtain when you’re on the net that in turn they want to map to your identity, thus even if you’re using tor/vpns to mask your IP, you’re still identifiable.
There are SOOOOOO many ways to implement age verification checks. And this is one of the worst. What is wrong with people
It’s because the goal is surveillance
But who the fuck is actually introducing these bills? Which entity/organisation/individual/company are they getting the ideas from?
THiel’s palinitir, he has been in the news ALOT lately talking about surveillance with his palinitir AI, plus its already being used by LEO. normally you never hear about THIEL that much in the news, because hes pretty “news adverse” person, if hes doing this, hes desperate.
even his boy-toy that get defenestrated in 2024 in florida, barely made the news
There is a (conspiracy) theory that Meta lobbies this shit in order to avoid having to verify the users’ age and not being culpable in case a minor uses their service.
i think its THIEL’s palinitir, mostly because its already being used LEO and through flock as well.
I buy that. It fits with literally all of Meta’s previous behavior and lobbying efforts.
It really doesn’t. This is more willing the lines of papintir, or other nsa adjacent companies.
Thiel and the Heritage Foundation
Palantir
The dark side
The mainstream media.
People responding to this are right about their actual intentions, but yeah. I think if you wanted to go about doing this the right way it would be an “I’m an adult” or a “this device is primarily used by a child” checkmark that could be locked down behind an administrative password.
That’s it. That’s all you really need if your intention was actually just makeing sure kids couldn’t wander into a part of the internet not made for them. Everything else, verification, that’s just surveillance bullshit being bolted on top.
But that is effectively what this bill does, just rather than a check box it is a date entry. There is no verification requirement. Only indication (attestation).
Respectfully I disagree. What I’m describing here is a checkmark. It’s a flag that gets turned on presumably by a parent and turned off presumably when the kid comes of age or gets their own computer or whatever. There is no date attached. There’s no personally identifiable information that your operating system is collecting and distributeing without your knowledge. At worst it’d allow people to be sorted into above and below certain ages, that’s it.
I get that what’s being proposed does not require verification (for now, way things are going I don’t necessarily expect that to stick). But even if your assuming good intent on the part of these law makers and corporations I still believe entering a date is too much of an invasion of privacy. If this is something we have to do (which I don’t believe it is but idiots seem to be forcing the issue) then it should be done with the least amout of data possible. That means a yea or nay on a binary checkbox.
Just to clarify the law does not allow your os to transmit your dob. Only your age bracket.
I’m aware, I just think the bracket is too much information. Besides, laws can be changed and increasingly laws are broken with zero repercussions. What is to stop Microsoft from not “transmitting” the information yet still using it internally for targeted advertising? Honestly the raw date of birth isn’t even needed for that. An age bracket would do fine and as far as I’m aware there are zero restrictions on Microsoft using that.
No, if your actually only interested in protecting kids, I think this is vast overkill. This is a mesure for surveillance and advertising and I think age brackets are more than sufficient for accomplishing that.
An “I am an adult” checkbox in your OS that gets propagated out is probably the most privacy centric way to lock down kid accounts right?
They want to require IDs which requires validation, which requires a central authority. Any websites you hit that require the check will request it from the OS which will need to verify with central authority. So they’ll know what websites your hitting.
Yup, the REAL goal here is to get an ID associated with an IP address to remove your anonymity from the web.
Governments already have an ID associated with an IP. There is no ISP that im aware of that lets you register anonymously.
Dynamic IPs, VPNs…
Dynamic IPs still have an ID associated. VPNs most can be subpoena for the true IP. Yes you can hide your IP but only a tiny fraction are doing that work and this law isnt going to affect them.
But the IDs are reused, they can really only track you while you’re using the internet.
Maybe I’m I don’t have enough of a technical understanding (and I’m wrong about this) but I believe there is some sort of fingerprint at the OS level (not IP or Mac) that they can obtain when you’re on the net that in turn they want to map to your identity, thus even if you’re using tor/vpns to mask your IP, you’re still identifiable.
This is different than the legislation being pushed in CA then, sorry it’s hard to keep up with the global enshittification of everything
Greed and control.