5 ms·
State Attorneys General Want to Tie Online Access to ID
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 8mo agoThe internet as we know it will be the first casualty of a great power hot war. We are living on borrowed time.
- dwedge 8mo agoIt's tiring how legislation like this is becoming predictable and feels inevitable. This article even mentions the verification needing to be embedded in the operating system itself, spelling the death of open computing
- sixtyj 8mo agoSome people have been saying for so long that you should need a license to use the internet, and now that we have it, it's a little different than we intended :(
- mothballed 8mo agoI'd argue it's more like KYC for the internet. Something HN users have brutally and ruthlessly defended for banking every time I argue it's a 4A violation (in fact, it's one of the most fiercely defended things anytime I bring it up). Give in 20+ years and you'll be called a kook for thinking otherwise.
- tired-turtle 8mo agoCan you explain the connection between KYC in banking and the Fourth Amendment? How does KYC constitute a government search/seizure?
- mothballed 8mo agoThe government requires the bank to search your identity documents to open an account, even when there is no individualized suspicion you've broken the law as to why your papers need to be searched, as part of the KYC regulations passed post 9/11. Technically it's not in the statute that they actually search your documents, but rather enforced through a byzantine series of federal regulatory frameworks that basically require them to do something that approximates "industry standard" KYC compliance which ends up being, verifying the customer through inspecting their identity and perhaps other documents. This is why i.e. when I was homeless even my passport couldn't open an account anywhere -- they wanted my passport plus some document showing an address to satisfy KYC requirements. Maybe I will have more energy for it tomorrow, I've been through this probably a couple dozen times on HN and I don't have the energy to go through the whole rigmarole today because usually it results in 2-3 days of someone fiercely disagreeing down some long chain and in the end I provide all the evidence and by that point no one is paying attention and it just goes into this pyrrhic victory where I get drained dry just for no one to give a shit. I should probably consolidate it into a blog post or something.
- kbelder 8mo agoKYC is one of the greatest government overreaches in the last several decades. I'll back you up on that.
- rockskon 8mo agoWe don't have it yet and there is still time to head this off. Not much time - but still time! Talk to your federal lawmakers and state AG's office!
- latency-guy2 8mo agoBad actors like -- William Tong, Anne E. Lopez, Dave Yost, Jonathan Skrmetti, Gwen Tauiliili-Langkilde, Kris Mayes, Tim Griffin, Rob Bonta, Phil Weiser, Kathleen Jennings, Brian Schwalb, Christopher M. Carr, Kwame Raoul, Todd Rokita, Kris Kobach, Russell Coleman, Liz Murrill, Aaron M. Frey, Anthony G. Brown, Andrea Joy Campbell, Dana Nessel, Keith Ellison, Lynn Fitch, Catherine L. Hanaway, Aaron D. Ford, John M. Formella, Jennifer Davenport, Raúl Torrez, Letitia James, Drew H. Wrigley, Gentner Drummond, Dan Rayfield, Dave Sunday, Peter F. Neronha, Alan Wilson, Marty Jackley, Gordon C. Rhea, Derek Brown, Charity Clark, and Keith Kautz -- Always operate under the assumption that the people serve the state, not the other way around. There are some names in that list that are outwardly infamous of this behavior, and none are surprising considering what type of person looks to be an AG. Maybe fighting fire with fire is appropriate - no such thing as a private life for any of these people, all their communications are open to the public 100% of the time and there are precisely 0 instances where it is not the case. It's only fair considering that is what their goal is for everyone not of the state.
- plagiarist 8mo agoPoettering will help get us remote attestation on Linux so we won't have to switch to Windows when it dies.
- brandensilva 8mo agoIt isn't a coincidence we have two Palantir articles on the front page and this. It's in the cards and American's seem to be ignoring it and are more than happy to accept the dystopian future where this leads. It's incredibly sad as an optimistic person trying to find any silver lining here.
- halJordan 8mo agoIt's already the law in California. I don't remember any outrage here when it was passed there.
- rockskon 8mo agoNo it isn't. There is no law in California that mandates showing an ID to see ambiguously-defined adult content.
- jamboca 8mo agoAt a certain point the world just becomes less appealing to live in. Day by day death becomes more appealing; what do you have to lose when life just means living in a pigpen?
- moneycantbuy 8mo agoresist
- jamboca 8mo agoplease help me find out how, im running out of reasons to be alive
- mmooss 8mo agoI think it must be awful to carry that around; it's awful to hear. You are important and I really hope you come to see that it's you that matters, not these outside events and people who you don't even know and who are fodder for HN and social media. When we devalue ourselves then things and people on the outside become relatively much more powerful and more significant. If we love ourselves - and you do deserve that - then they really don't matter. It's not that the world and life and events don't matter at all, but it's only a fraction of how it may feel now; it's a whole different perspective and experience. People have survived decades of oppression, prison and worse on that basis. Turn off the social media and the news if it will help - that stuff is not important; you are. I could care less about all this stuff on HN if you, a real person, is ok. And talk to a professional, a therapist; you don't have to feel this way and it can change your life. I really hope that helps you some.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- moneycantbuy 8mo agowe really need better leadership
- shevy-java 8mo agoThe strange thing is that all leaders end up doing the same. I wonder if direct democracy would be possible. Right now we are like in a Trueman show movie.
- moneycantbuy 8mo agosomehow need to remove money from politics. also need a more informed citizenry able to see through propaganda.
- loteck 8mo agoNobody who would be any good at the job wants to waste their life campaigning for it.
- stopbulying 8mo agoWhat is a good resource for reviewing the advantages and disadvantages of mandatory Real ID for Internet access? Aren't there sound reasons to support anonymous whistleblowing? Would there be critical feedback without pseudo-anonymity on the internet? But you folks just have to dom all the haters. What is their favorite thing: stuffed animal brand, candy, musical artist? But then wouldn't undercover ops be obvious? Is this similar to the "ban all crypto" movements that periodically forget everything we've learned about infosec and protecting folks? Do protectees' deserve privacy for their safety? In the 1990s, they told us kids not to use our real names or addresses on the internet.
- stopbulying 8mo agoWhy is this downvoted?
- shevy-java 8mo agoThey want to sniff after everyone. The "omg terrorists" or "omg children" is the lie.
- rootsudo 8mo agoRIP Internet. I don't agree with any of this, but I don't see the majority of people protesting this. If anything, promotion it because: Think of the children. "Many social media platforms deliberately target minors, fueling a nationwide youth mental health crisis." ". These platforms are intentionally designed to be addictive, particularly for underaged users, and generate substantial profits by monetizing minors’ personal data through targeted advertising. These companies fail to adequately disclose the addictive nature of their products or the well-documented harms associated with excessive social media use. Increasing evidence demonstrates that these companies are aware of the adverse mental health consequences imposed on underage users, yet they have chosen to persist in these practices. Accordingly, many of our Offices have initiated investigations and filed lawsuits against Meta and TikTok for their role in harming minors. " Yet, the comapnies aren't being regulated, nor the algorithims, the marketing or even the existence. It's the users that are the problem therefore everyone has to submit their Identity to use the Internet if this passes.
- gjsman-1000 8mo agoI blame HN and Silicon Valley in general for consistently treating keeping children online safe as a parental responsibility only, rather than a government-parent team effort like every other regulation. This loophole, “think of the children,” would not exist if SV had gotten over itself and not called very solution unworkable while insisting that any solution parents receive, no matter how sloppy or confusing, is workable.
- pavel_lishin 8mo agoAren't most of these problems directly caused by the government claiming to do these things to protect children?
- dwedge 8mo agoYeah exactly, had it not been for Facebook and the rest of social media not taking children online seriously, The Simpsons wouldn't have had to mock the cultural meme of blaming everything on saving children back in 1996 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RybNI0KB1bg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RybNI0KB1bg
- whearyou 8mo agoBetween this and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47026134 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47026134 on the front page it feels, yet again, like we’re speed running to living in a Peter Watts novel
- rockskon 8mo agoIf this really bothers you, talk to your state AG's office and your federal lawmaker The worst that can happen is you don't change things. The best? Maybe you'll find a receptive ear. Your lawmaker stops co-sponsoring KOSA. Your state AG stops pushing for it.
- rolph 8mo agoi think the worst that can happen is you could be put on a list of dissention.
- rockskon 8mo agoBeing active about KOSA won't get you put on a "list of dissenters". This is an issue being pushed by the States and your federal lawmakers, not the executive branch.
- rockskon 8mo agoA list of people who dissent to KOSA is not a bad list to be on as a constituent. You need to make it easier for your lawmakers to be on that list too. Show them there's people who won't rake them over the coals for bowing out.
- hammock 8mo agoIsn’t that the point? Our lawmakers keep track of how many constituents approve or disapprove of pending legislation so they can act accordingly
- rolph 8mo agoso they can act accordingly is the variable, a simple headcount is one thing, but when it creeps like a census, then it is prone to polyusary. putting the consiracy hat on, the exploit is to direct as many installed AGs to push for such bills, with no big letdown if they dont pass, why/because, the demographics on dissention are valuable and are, passed to a hostile federal government.
- Trasmatta 8mo ago
- _heimdall 8mo agoAnd why wouldn't a state attorney want this? I expect cops would also like blanket warrants usable whenever they deem necessary. That doesn't mean they should get what they might want, or that its Constitutional.
- direwolf20 8mo agoI have mixed feelings about this website, reclaimthenet. In one breath it supports net neutrality and and opposes ID laws, and in the next — not in this particular article — mentions the Twitter files and says the UK is a dictatorship for arresting Lucy Connolly.
- fluidcruft 8mo agoWould this mean spammers and advertisers cannot send me email and ads if I refuse to allow my mailbox to authenticate my age to them?
- potsandpans 8mo agoNo
- fluidcruft 8mo agoDrats
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- ls612 8mo agoI’m going to go against the pessimism here and say that this is the US not Europe or the UK and the First Amendment has teeth. There’s ample Supreme Court precedent that anonymous speech is a protected right (Talley vs CA, Macintyre vs Ohio, etc) so I’d expect efforts like this to flounder in the courts if push came to shove.
- 13415 8mo agoWhat the US Supreme Court decides is much less relevant than it used to be because the US executive can and will simply ignore the decision. If anyone in the US administration breaks the law, they can be pardoned by the US president,if the president breaks the law, he's immune against prosecution based on a previous decision of the Supreme Court, and no court can enforce anything if the executive doesn't comply with the court order.
- dynm 8mo agoWhat I find puzzling about these proposals is that it SEEMS like they could be designed to achieve 90% of the stated goals with almost 0% of the loss of privacy. The idea would be that devices could "opt in" to safety rather than opt out. Allow parents to purchase a locked-down device that always includes a "kids" flag whenever it requests online information, and simply require online services to not provide kid-unfriendly information if that flag is included. I know a lot of people believe that this is just all just a secret ploy to destroy privacy. Personally, I don't think so. I think they genuinely want to protect kids, and the privacy destruction is driven by a combination of not caring and not understanding.
- KoolKat23 8mo agoI have not once seen a proposal actually contain zero knowledge proof. This isn't something exotic or difficult. It is clear to me there is ulterior motives, and perhaps a few well meaning folks have been co-opted.
- dynm 8mo agoFWIW, the EU is working on zero-knowledge proofs: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-makes-available-age-verification-blueprint https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-mak... But I strongly prefer my solution!
- digiown 8mo agoA ZKP will work as a base, but the proof mechanism will have to be combined with anti-user measures like device attestation to prevent things like me offering an API to continually sign requests for strangers. You can rate-limit it, or you can add an identifier, both of which makes it not zero knowledge. Parent's proposal is better in that it would only take away general purpose computing from children rather than from everyone. A sympathetic parent can also allow it anyway, just like how a parent can legally provide a teen with alcohol in most places. As a society we generally consider that parents have a right to decide which things are appropriate for their children.
- 8mo ago
- SilverElfin 8mo agoIf there are 40 state Attorney Generals signing this letter, this must include a number of Democrat lead states as well correct?
- wmf 8mo agoLack of privacy is pretty bipartisan.
- sneak 8mo agoAll forms of citizen power, such as widespread publishing, will eventually be tied to strong ID requirements. You can’t illegally retaliate against citizens if you don’t know where they sleep at night.
- Pikamander2 8mo ago> 40 State Attorneys General Want To Tie Online Access to ID Here's the actual title of the article, which is much more concerning than the HN title.
- pdonis 8mo agoInstead of lobbying for taking away everyone's privacy, why isn't the government going after those they say are the actual culprits? From the article: "The attorneys general argue that social media companies deliberately design products that draw in underage users and monetize their personal data through targeted advertising. They contend that companies have not adequately disclosed addictive features or mental health risks and point to evidence suggesting firms are aware of adverse consequences for minors." Okay, so why aren't they going after the social media companies?
- cadamsdotcom 8mo agoThey are in some other democracies. We will see how it all plays out.
- wmf 8mo agohttps://www.njoag.gov/ag-platkin-41-other-attorneys-general-sue-meta-for-harms-to-youth-from-instagram-facebook/ https://www.njoag.gov/ag-platkin-41-other-attorneys-general-...
- pdonis 8mo agoOk, so then why do they need all this other Federal legislation?
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- ottah 8mo agoNext they'll try to make Tor and I2p illegal.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- zi2zi-jit 8mo agoIn the 90s they told kids: don't give strangers your real name online. In 2026: the government demands your ID to access the internet. Progress.
- asdff 8mo agoTo be fair some things loosened others tightened. In the 90s you were much more flippant with your social security number.
- kkfx 8mo agoThe Sinicization of the West continues, yet people still aren't pushing back; there are no indefinite general strikes, nor is there anyone foaming at the mouth demanding the arrest of the coup plotters in power... I suggest to (re)read - https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Global%20Trends_Mapping%20the%20Global%20Future%202020%20Project.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Global%20Trends_Mapping%... - https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Reports%20and%20Pubs/2025_Global_Trends_Final_Report.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Reports%20and%2... These predictions have largely come true.
- elektronika 8mo agoIf you can't beat them join them. The rest of the world is getting the same thing as China, but less transparent and more hypocritical.
- nephihaha 8mo agoI love the way they pretend they are doing this of their own volition when Australia, Canada, the EU and UK are all doing the same thing.
- MilnerRoute 8mo ago"We rate Reclaim The Net as Right-Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that align with a conservative perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to poor sourcing, lack of transparency, and one-sided biased reporting." https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reclaim-the-net-bias/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reclaim-the-net-bias/
- csense 8mo agoAnonymous or pseudonymous publishing is an essential element of Constitutionally protected freedom of speech [1]. If the government knows who's posting what, it's a lot easier for them to harass, intimidate, punish, or otherwise suppress people who post uncomfortable or politically inconvenient things. Recent New York Times headline: "Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts". I'm sure the administration would be very happy if there was a database of government issued photo ID's for every account on Facebook. And if the government gets the ID's of those accounts, I'm quite sure nothing good will come of it for either the individuals involved, or the ability of the people to understand whether the government department in question is going about its duties in a way that respects the law and the Constitution. [1] My username refers to an anonymously published pamphlet that played a key role in US history.
- kjellsbells 8mo agoI guess HN leans strongly towards the pro-anonymity viewpoint, and sure, the "think of the children!" claim has worn very thin. But: what methods could that reduce the harm that anonymous internet discourse so often produces? People send death threats, threats of sexual assault, harassment of all kinds, unsolicited pics of their genitals, swat attacks, just absolute nonsense all day every day, hiding behind the veil of anonymity and the asymmetry between the cost of sending such trash and the cost to track it down and do something about it. There is, quite unusually in politics, a bit of a bipartisan consensus that this is a real, real problem, and that steps like this, or repealing Section 230, would help. Would it, or would it not, and if not, what alternatives are there?
- brapgoestheuzi 8mo ago[dead]