- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
After reading about this on hacker news, I get why they do it. Its to make people upload identification documents, to get them prepped to authenticate for using the internet. Now the world makes sense again. I was wondering why they would do something positive. But now I get it.
You must log in or # to comment.
I think its a big positive
That’s an ironic position to hold given your username…
Well I changed my opinion. :)
No mention of enforcement in that article. No kids getting fined or arrested for using VPNs or buying accounts off others. This law is primarily a Trojan horse to build the ID document and facial recognition databases and smash the scourge of anonymous people criticising governments and oligarchs.
Why does almost everything that is supposed to protect kids turn out to be another authoritarian fantasy of the ruling class?
Because when you talk about protection or safety for children or animals or [insert vulnerable group here] you can short-circuit a lot of people’s reason/skepticism.
Because evil runs these people. Its actually that simple. When these guys speak, its easy to hear they are evil, because of how they speak.
And they know other people are good, so they wont immediately agree with a dystopian society. So you take small steps, where each one looks good on the surface to the billions of people who only hear about this for 5 seconds on the news.
online was one of the first positive queer places i had since i didn’t have anything irl; stef sanjati was also the first out trans person who made me realise i could do this.
which i suspect is the entire reasoning for the ban.Probably bigger than that - they want to make all of us feel watched. But yeah, its worse if you are in a group the US government is currently oppressing. The way things are going, I guess we all will be in some kind of a group like that sooner or later. Like “social media terrorist” for having negative opinions about the US online.
I see that you’ve changed your opinion, OP, but I still have a question.
How did seeing this as positive go together with being on the fediverse? How do the volunteers running this thing cope with these demands?
More generally: How can the open internet survive if every local government makes its own rules about what information or service you may or mustn’t give its citizens?
America is already deciding almost everything about the internet, through owning the operating systems, the networks, big tech companies, Ai, and so on.
They could make a law that forces all major american websites to require a global auth cookie, that people can only get by doing age verification at some site.
I can’t really make sense of that. Do you understand that Lemmy instances are run by just some random people?
Yes of course. I meant that they are part of the social media thing, and they may also be required to implement age verification if things become bad.
they may also be required to implement age verification
They are already required. Australia is requiring them to do exactly that. It’s a safe bet that this will be ignored for now, at least outside of Australia.
Suppose the fediverse wanted to comply, what do you think the volunteers running it would have to do?
Just guessing here but maybe implement support for some kind of dystopian cookie that all visitors need to have in their browser…
Well. Step 1 is monitoring legal requirements around the world. In all the 50 US states, 200 countries, and whatever other kind of jurisdiction feels important.
You have to age gate social media for 16+ in Australia. Some content is criminal in some countries. Some content is 18+ in some countries but not in others. Some countries require such content to be age gated, others do not.
What kind of age verification is acceptable also varies…
You need to constantly have your eye on new laws, legal precedents, or decision by regulators and adapt.
And that doesn’t even begin to address the technological problems.
Another angle is that this is Newscorp pushing the Labor govt for this to consolidate the news delivery and away from the ad-bypassing social media platforms.
But it’s mostly just a test to see if people will bend over or if this is even enforceable long term.
I think it’s a big positive
Is it really? Ask yourself, is the oppression of individuals based on age really a positive?
Do the voices, opinions and perspectives of those most impacted by this monstrous lawn not matter to you? Because all this proves is your support towards a fascist regime.
Of course, technological factors such as those you have outlined come in play as well. This law is a stepping stone for a totalitarian police state where everyone is impacted - irrespective of age.
However, the resonance induced in taking control of the corporations, by ultimately taking control of a class of individuals based on fallacious ageist remarks - is what makes this counterproductive, non-inclusive and destructive to trust.
There are individuals within that class that are using their might into defending their human rights, youth rights - and all you’re doing with supporting this law is disregarding them and treating them as sub-humans. One group of teenagers used 1984 as a highlight to the situation, and they are right. Ageist, infantilisation doesn’t solve nothing.
As stated before, this law has both issues in technological and egalitarian perspectives. And it’s up to you to decide if you are really against corporatocracy or if you’re just a fascist in disguise.
Yeah I understood what its really about when I read hacker news comments.
