1 comment

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

This has nothing to do with kids other than them being the excuse.

The Epstein class pushing this type of legislation around the world doesn't care about the safety of children.

  • source
  • 28 comments in c/privacy@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 44 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Just out a device age range for fucks same, this is insane.

    Build a whole industry of surveillance companies to solve “I was too lazy to enter my kids age restrictions”

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago

    Yes it is stupid that laws and the internet are changed instead of parents using parental controls.

    But this was never about protecting children in the first place.

    When VPN doesn't work to get around age verification (because it's globally required) it will be time to get off the internet I think.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

    Lazy parents put iPads in kids' faces. Lazy parents also don't bother setting parental controls. Too many Spider-Man and Pregnant Elsa videos happened. Now lawmakers are using this as an excuse to get us to submit our papers to get online.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I agree spiderman-elsa is degenerate, that parents are lazy, but I also think these authoritarian fucks would use any pretense to push their agenda and our struggle against them will never end.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago*

    Spiderman pragent Elsa degeneracy is still tame compared to the degeneracy I saw on the internet on 1998 at age 12. I saw ladies pissing, a DIY clitorodectomy, a fella chop the tip of his finger off with a chisel, a guy stealing a human skull from the Paris catacombs and fucking the eye sockets, a human Skellington who got eaten by pihranas, and a Russian man being decapitated by Chechen lads, and that was just Tuesday.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 29 points 4 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    Yeah we gotta keep the kids off the innernet so they don't fall victim to predators.. Unless they're billionaires.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago* (8 children)

    Goodbye Fediverse if this passes, because it'll surely kill that network. Goodbye FOSS too as that won't be able to comply the with web DRM that will surely be this law's enforcement mechanism.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Skimming the bill, it seems at least one of the definitions in it requires that platforms, in order to be covered by it, do this:

    (E) Uses the personal information of the user to advertise, market, or make content recommendations.

    Fediverse instances usually don't do this, so wouldn't be covered at least by this definition, though I haven't yet read the bill in detail.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Why couldn't the Fediverse resist something like this? Doesn't decentralization help to fight against this?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    You can probably use an instance outside of the US. But yeah, the internet will change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

    Better get used to living in NK, because the whole free world is turning into that. I just contacted my rep, but given the state I live in already age-gated porn sites and no doubt wants to lock down the general web too, it probably won't amount to much.

    You can probably use an instance outside of the US.

    • Wouldn't those instances be blocked by the national firewall that's surely about to go up?
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago*

    Much of what we hear about that place is pure, dystopian propaganda modeled off of Orwell’s work. It’s no surprise that the governments actually trying to create such living conditions are the UK and other Anglophone nations. Every year we descend further into hell.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    The US is about to become another censored country. Thanks, Fuhrer Trump.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    In order to protect children from problems their parents create by allowing them unfettered access, we will infantilize the entire population of the planet and ensure that no one can say or do anything that is not befitting Supply Side Jesus's interpretation of morality.

    Glory to our supreme capitalist overlords.

    I will enjoy dipping their eyeballs in marinara sauce by the end of this.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    In the words of the great sage George Carlin: "Fuck the children!"

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago
    [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    It is only for web browser, usenet and darknet is still fine, right ?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    They're the next targets, if they're not also targeted in this very bill.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    The government wants untraceable, anonymous user profiles they can control and use for espionage, etc., but also wish to track every user who accesses the web.

    They’re destroying their own tools as a trade off to control the population. (They feel weak and are worried about uprisings.) Soon enough the internet will require your digital ID for every website. At which point you might as well just get rid of your PC and smartphone and forget about the web entirely.

    If the tracking is no longer a background phenomena you can avoid if you’re diligent, but instead you’re carded each time you use the web, then it’s no longer a free information system worth using.

  • source
  • parent
  • 5 comments in c/pcmasterrace@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 24 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    It's not going to work. Kids are smarter than congressmen. It's so easy for them to find a workaround, they'll be online within minutes. Just ask Australia how theirs is going.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 4 months ago

    They don't care because that isn't anywhere near the actual goal or point. The point is to continue moving the needle for what is considered "the norm" to remove one of the few places left where you can be anonymous/untraceable.

    It's part of a much broader push to get real identity somehow inseparably merged with our tech, so everything you do can be traced back to your real life identity because it's all connected to it by default.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    There will be NO MORE memes of Homelander!!!

  • source
  • 1 comment in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] [S] 16 points 4 months ago

    The "KIDS Act" Is an Age Surveillance Bill, Take Action. Tell Congress to reject this age-gating bill

    Within the next week, Congress is preparing to vote on the KIDS Act, a sprawling package of legislation that seeks to control Americans’ web browsing and private messaging. The package includes a revised version of the Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA, combined with a collection of other internet bills, study bills, reporting requirements, and new regulations. Instead of debating any of these proposals on their merits, lawmakers are attempting to move them all at once under an ultra-expedited process. 

    The package of cobbled-together bills is a mess, with different age-gating schemes for different services, using different standards. It’s a lot of complexity, and a lot of legal risk. Faced with that, many companies will conclude that the safest option is restrictive age-checking practices across their entire platforms.

    Buried inside the KIDS Act are provisions that will push online services to verify all users’ ages, require government-directed moderation policies for online speech, and even create new rules about private and encrypted communications. While supporters continue to claim this bill protects minors online, its requirements come at the expense of privacy, free expression, and the ability of people of all ages to use the internet without revealing sensitive data.

  • source
  • 1 comment in c/pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub view that post
    [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    Think of the children!

  • source