Post AV4hKiHPatwEdl86hk by satsuma@dice.camp
 (DIR) More posts by satsuma@dice.camp
 (DIR) Post #AV428h8nuFqdVqFoR6 by lauren@mastodon.laurenweinstein.org
       2023-04-27T03:00:23Z
       
       0 likes, 2 repeats
       
       I see many people still don't understand this. When legislation calls for children to get permission from parents for social media use and/or be under restricted hours, this requires that *ALL* users of social media, children, parents, people with no children, etc. be identified by government IDs (in the case of young children, via their parents' IDs). Again, even if you don't have kids, YOU WILL BE REQUIRED to use government ID for access, otherwise you cannot prove you are NOT a child. Think about it.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV4Q0vwHOxvdzVEByi by airtower@queer.af
       2023-04-27T07:27:12Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @lauren And then also think about how much parents who abuse their children would love being able to decide if they will be able talk to anyone else.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV4hKiHPatwEdl86hk by satsuma@dice.camp
       2023-04-27T10:41:46Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @lauren also requires any website that could be considered as social media to verify and store user identities. Ok for big media companies that can absorb the cost, but small companies (or even individuals running their own mastodon instance) could be in legal jeopardy.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV5zg4sEmJ5z81eSOm by mike805@fosstodon.org
       2023-04-28T01:42:05Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @lauren this was declared unconstitutional in the USA in 1996, by the Supreme Court. The case was a federal law that required all "indecent" content to be behind a hard ID check.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV621mNmPOZq3esh9s by lauren@mastodon.laurenweinstein.org
       2023-04-28T02:08:32Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @mike805 Newly in place in at least one state as of very recently. 1996 was almost 30 years ago. As you may have noticed, the makeup and decisions of the court have changed since then, e.g. on abortion. No reason not to expect similar hard tacks to the right from the current court, especially when the ID legislations now emerging almost all have bipartisan support.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV62uE3Hka8xVjFzv6 by mike805@fosstodon.org
       2023-04-28T02:18:19Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @lauren the Supreme Court has been messed up on property rights (allowing civil forfeiture for example) but has been pretty based on freedom of speech. Hopefully it stays that way.Wherever politics goes, we need reliable technical means of defying any censorship, and it needs to be designed so no one person can be made an example of.So far the most robust tools seem to be Tor and Bittorrent. When you put out a torrent it is well and truly out of the bag.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV63YQXajj5XpMbO8O by lauren@mastodon.laurenweinstein.org
       2023-04-28T02:25:39Z
       
       1 likes, 1 repeats
       
       @mike805 You know how it works in China? VPNs are generally prohibited. Some people still use them. And are arrested, and vanish. Don't think it could happen here in all manner of Internet contexts? Women are having their rights stripped from them. Locking down the Internet is simple by comparison. Start with the big firms and ISPs, and work your way down. Tor became law enforcement best friend, and many crooks on Tor discovered.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV64GAM0HRF4Mm2Qam by mike805@fosstodon.org
       2023-04-28T02:33:33Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @lauren I have actually set up VPNs for people in China. OpenVPN with the tls-crypt option works most of the time. And the Chinese people I know are merely annoyed when their VPNs are down, not terrified.Most of the Tor busts were not done by hacking Tor, they happened because someone did something dumb and leaked his identity. Sure a hidden service can be found eventually. The point is to spread the services out so there is no one big target. Or put the hidden service in a safe country.
       
 (DIR) Post #AV688vGoMXS1NHPYO0 by mike805@fosstodon.org
       2023-04-28T03:16:55Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @lauren just went and read your blog. And I am not convinced Google and the like are doing a bad job of public relations.I think they WANT regulation. Regulation usually freezes the current system in place. Big companies can afford to work the regulators, startups cannot.Every other word out of their mouth about AI is "safety" meaning censorship. Google wants to be the world's censor, giving it permanent political and financial power.Running your own instance is awesome.
       
 (DIR) Post #AVDTcC7gF2fLBTeuTg by summersun704@tweesecake.social
       2023-05-01T16:20:14Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @lauren Is that not common sense?