39
Age Verification: What’s sold as “online safety” means surveillance via id checks or face scans. (tuta.com)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/privacy@programming.dev
comment fedilink hide all child comments
 

Cross posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/53553563

no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
9 comments in c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk view that post
[–] 27 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Such online safety that when a website almost every politician and journalist is on has publicly visible CSAM, fuck all is done about it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago

    It's almost like this law is more about shutting down small online forums that might organise and agitate against governments than it is about safety online, isn't it?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    The act is what the government are threatening Twitter with...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Oooh, big scary threats! What have they done though?

    Do you think piefed.social or Feddit.UK would be up long if they were doing the same thing? They would be immediately blocked and the admins arrested. No such thing has happened to Twitter.

    Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

    We are ruled by Red Conservatives.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    I don't think that's true. The act is enforced through ofcom which takes its sweet time.

    That quote about conservativism is pithy bollocks. Conservativism is about protecting the status quo, nothing else. If you believe the quote then you'll look very cool in front of your cynical friends, but also misattribute motives every which way.

    There are tons of small sites available in the UK which violate the OSA but fly under the radar due to their small size, so this kind of conspiracy brain thinking just doesn't hold water.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    But Twitter doesn't and didn't fly under the radar. Every politician and journalist and average Joe knows about it. It's been headline news for days.

    They're taking their sweet time because Musk has power. He has vast amounts of money (richest man in the world, rivaling some countries), he has very close ties with Trump and the American government, and controls other services which the UK has contracts with (e.g. Starlink). Not because that's how Ofcom works. Ofcom can and has responded quickly to laws in the past. What sort of bullshit paedo apoligism is that argument?

    You're making excuses for CSAM distributed by the richest man in the world, why?

    The rule of law is not being applied the same to Twitter as it would any other website. My quote stands.

    Flying under the radar is not the same as being known and ignored. Flying under the radar explicitly means it's unknown. If the state were made aware of these sites they would act.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago

    You're just repeating your assertion that the time taken for Ofcom to act against X is due to improper influence but haven't given any evidence. What examples are you thinking of where Ofcom has acted quickly? This controversy has, I believe, been going on for three weeks, prominently only for one.

    The Online Safety Act specifies time limits for responses from services, and those time limits themselves vary from a week to several months. Ofcom also publishes updates on its investigations and the one I'm familiar with - Imgur - took months to do anything.

    You're making excuses for CSAM distributed by the richest man in the world, why?

    Take me through your line of reasoning here: I don't think Ofcom is giving Twitter special treatment; ???; therefore I'm making excuses for CSAM? Please do fill in the missing steps.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    In France they have a separate company that verifies the age, and when you then visit your eccentric and embarrassing porn site, they verify the age, but provide no further info.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    2 comments in c/privacy@programming.dev view that post
    [–] 6 points 9 months ago

    The no shit thingy everyone always warned about... I don't want to sound like a grade A moron, but I'm starting to think its all intentional

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 5 points 9 months ago

    Secret social scores by palantir and like companies. To decide whether you get loans, which jobs, what prices you pay, what results you are shown on social media. With ai making those half baked assumptions, no way to challenge it, no way to know what they are using.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    1 comment in c/privacy@programming.dev view that post
    [–] 31 points 1 year ago

    TLDR: Kills anonymity.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    1 comment in c/privacy@lemmy.ca view that post
    [–] 14 points 9 months ago

    I'll stop using the internet before I give up my anonymity. They can wrench my privacy from my cold, dead hand.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •