3 ms·

You've accepted the overton window shift that age verification is an inevitability and that we need to give up information to the operating system because any o

You've accepted the overton window shift that age verification is an inevitability and that we need to give up information to the operating system because any other way would violate our privacy! It's naive to see this internationally coordinated effort to "save the children" as anything other than the temperature in the pot being turned up. > implemented in a competent way (ie. it's not just providing an id scan for any app to read) What if there are vulnerabilities? You're inherently introducing more attack surface and providing more data than you would without these laws.

gruez 7mo ago
>You've accepted the overton window shift that age verification is an inevitability and that we need to give up information to the operating system because any other way would violate your privacy! It's naive to see this internationally coordinated effort to "save the children" as anything other than the temperature in the pot being turned up. If you're trying to imply Meta is behind the "overton window shift", that's plainly not the case. The popular sentiment that smartphones and social networks are harming kids (thereby necessitating bans/verification) has been boiling over for a while now (eg. "The Anxious Generation, 2024", and the recent social media bans in Australia), and meta is just trying to get ahead of this with laws that favor them. >What if there are vulnerabilities? You're inherently introducing more attack surface and providing more data than you would without these laws. Probably less likely to cause vulnerabilities than web usb or web bluetooth , both of which gets some pushback here but nowhere as much an API that returns a number.
- hypeatei 7mo ago
  > If you're trying to imply Meta is behind the "overton window shift", that's plainly not the case No, I'm saying the exact opposite: Meta is just one player in a campaign from intelligence agencies and other tech companies who want to normalize mandated prompts in your OS that collect information. Right now it's "just a DOB field bro" turns into "well... people can lie with the DOB field, let's just add a ID check step in that dialog" and build on it from there. Of course the pot has been boiling for a while and it's not just Meta looking for regulatory capture. > Probably less likely to cause vulnerabilities I don't care about likelihoods, this "feature" inherently introduces more risk and for something I don't even want on my computer. Even a small chance that this can be abused is unacceptable.
edgyquant 7mo ago
I find it odd when people write off policies as using “save the children” or “protect women” as if this isn’t something people are really capable of thinking. You fail to understand why the Overton window has shifted because you fail to understand people really are worried about their children
- hypeatei 7mo ago
  I don't know of any surveillance state act that used "protect women" as their top line, but maybe I missed it. > because you fail to understand people really are worried about their children No, I completely understand but that doesn't give anyone the right to start mandating that we give up our privacy in pursuit of that. That's sorta the joke with "save the children", it's meant to tug at your emotions and make you look like a bad person for not consenting to massive overreach.
  - edgyquant 7mo ago
    No it isn’t “meant” to do anything but reflect a desire to protect children. You’re projecting.
    - hypeatei 7mo ago
      Okay, so not every single person pushing surveillance is a bad faith actor and there are some parents in there who truly want the best for children. How does that change the substance of my point about overreach?
      - edgyquant 7mo ago
        We have laws going back decades requiring people to show id to purchase pornography and r rated movies. Why do tech companies get a pass on this?

gruez 7mo ago

>You've accepted the overton window shift that age verification is an inevitability and that we need to give up information to the operating system because any other way would violate your privacy! It's naive to see this internationally coordinated effort to "save the children" as anything other than the temperature in the pot being turned up. If you're trying to imply Meta is behind the "overton window shift", that's plainly not the case. The popular sentiment that smartphones and social networks are harming kids (thereby necessitating bans/verification) has been boiling over for a while now (eg. "The Anxious Generation, 2024", and the recent social media bans in Australia), and meta is just trying to get ahead of this with laws that favor them. >What if there are vulnerabilities? You're inherently introducing more attack surface and providing more data than you would without these laws. Probably less likely to cause vulnerabilities than web usb or web bluetooth , both of which gets some pushback here but nowhere as much an API that returns a number.

hypeatei 7mo ago
> If you're trying to imply Meta is behind the "overton window shift", that's plainly not the case No, I'm saying the exact opposite: Meta is just one player in a campaign from intelligence agencies and other tech companies who want to normalize mandated prompts in your OS that collect information. Right now it's "just a DOB field bro" turns into "well... people can lie with the DOB field, let's just add a ID check step in that dialog" and build on it from there. Of course the pot has been boiling for a while and it's not just Meta looking for regulatory capture. > Probably less likely to cause vulnerabilities I don't care about likelihoods, this "feature" inherently introduces more risk and for something I don't even want on my computer. Even a small chance that this can be abused is unacceptable.

edgyquant 7mo ago

I find it odd when people write off policies as using “save the children” or “protect women” as if this isn’t something people are really capable of thinking. You fail to understand why the Overton window has shifted because you fail to understand people really are worried about their children

hypeatei 7mo ago
I don't know of any surveillance state act that used "protect women" as their top line, but maybe I missed it. > because you fail to understand people really are worried about their children No, I completely understand but that doesn't give anyone the right to start mandating that we give up our privacy in pursuit of that. That's sorta the joke with "save the children", it's meant to tug at your emotions and make you look like a bad person for not consenting to massive overreach.
- edgyquant 7mo ago
  No it isn’t “meant” to do anything but reflect a desire to protect children. You’re projecting.
  - hypeatei 7mo ago
    Okay, so not every single person pushing surveillance is a bad faith actor and there are some parents in there who truly want the best for children. How does that change the substance of my point about overreach?
    - edgyquant 7mo ago
      We have laws going back decades requiring people to show id to purchase pornography and r rated movies. Why do tech companies get a pass on this?