4 ms·

I hope people can see Meta is funding the other side in order to get Child Safety laws passed so they can have an out when children use their parent's device an

I hope people can see Meta is funding the other side in order to get Child Safety laws passed so they can have an out when children use their parent's device and Meta spies on them. Child Safety laws are just mass surveillance in disguise which has always been Meta's game plan since day one.

gruez 2mo ago
>Child Safety laws are just mass surveillance in disguise which has always been Meta's game plan since day one. I thought they were pushing for on-device age verification, which from a "mass surveillance" perspective is pretty bad? If you wanted mass surveillance, you'd want mandatory ID verification by sites and/or government SSO, both of which allows you to capture a persistent identifier. Of course, meta isn't doing all this lobbying out of altruism. Doing on-device verification means they're off the hook for it, and google/apple has the shoulder the burden instead.
- digitaltrees 2mo ago
  The only reason age verification isn’t mandatory is because it isn’t scalable. A few states are moving forward with digital drivers licenses. When there are digital drivers licenses, passports and social security cards you’ll see a renewal to push verification.
dsabanin 2mo ago
I seriously doubt that the FaceMash guy was planning mass surveillance from day one. The people who propped him up might have, though.
- phyzix5761 2mo ago
  FaceMash is a very primitive example of mass surveillance and data gathering: use people's pictures without their consent, collect the social rankings in a database somewhere.
- digitaltrees 2mo ago
  Wrong. He literally made fun of users for giving information that he could use to spy on them and share that ability with friends. It was a childish form of spying but the intent was there and the monetization tactic came later.
- deaux 2mo ago
  He was definitely planning on PII abuse at scale for personal gain from day one. Probably not planning mass surveillance, but from all we know of him, he wouldn't have disliked the idea.
tikimcfee 2mo ago
Dissolve the company. Jail the C levels. End of story. If this ends in another fine to put into a ledger book I'll scream. The fine ends up back in their pockets in months in the form of loans and grants and tax avoidances and so on. The world no longer needs Facebook and its leaders. It does not need its technology. It does not need the ideas of the people that are there. If you are still working there, you are complicit in acting in a company that is actively seeking to control a populous. I understand it's hard not to work for "big tech" and not work for a company trying to control populous. So yes. I agree. Stop letting them play games with the rules we spent generations putting in place to protect our citizenship.
- dylan604 2mo ago
  > If this ends in another fine to put into a ledger book I'll scream. Get your pillow ready, because this is the only thing that'll happen if the verdict goes against them. Of course, the verdict could go the other way so no fine is levied at all. Maybe get a second pillow just in case
  - abirch 2mo ago
    Buy a copy of Careless People to read between the tears.
    - rhyperior 2mo ago
      Fascinating story. The author was hopelessly ignorant and guilty of facilitating, but the execs were so devoid of anything approaching ethics or morality. Explains a lot if true.
      - SoftTalker 2mo ago
        Unless you've been on the inside at the top levels of huge companies, you don't know about the sheer sociopathy of the people there. It's easy, even normal, to be naive as a regular employee, even one at a fairly high management level.
consensus1 2mo ago
So you want them to be held responsible when kids use their platform, but you don't want them to be able to prevent kids from using it?

gruez 2mo ago

>Child Safety laws are just mass surveillance in disguise which has always been Meta's game plan since day one. I thought they were pushing for on-device age verification, which from a "mass surveillance" perspective is pretty bad? If you wanted mass surveillance, you'd want mandatory ID verification by sites and/or government SSO, both of which allows you to capture a persistent identifier. Of course, meta isn't doing all this lobbying out of altruism. Doing on-device verification means they're off the hook for it, and google/apple has the shoulder the burden instead.

digitaltrees 2mo ago
The only reason age verification isn’t mandatory is because it isn’t scalable. A few states are moving forward with digital drivers licenses. When there are digital drivers licenses, passports and social security cards you’ll see a renewal to push verification.

dsabanin 2mo ago

I seriously doubt that the FaceMash guy was planning mass surveillance from day one. The people who propped him up might have, though.

phyzix5761 2mo ago
FaceMash is a very primitive example of mass surveillance and data gathering: use people's pictures without their consent, collect the social rankings in a database somewhere.
digitaltrees 2mo ago
Wrong. He literally made fun of users for giving information that he could use to spy on them and share that ability with friends. It was a childish form of spying but the intent was there and the monetization tactic came later.
deaux 2mo ago
He was definitely planning on PII abuse at scale for personal gain from day one. Probably not planning mass surveillance, but from all we know of him, he wouldn't have disliked the idea.

tikimcfee 2mo ago

Dissolve the company. Jail the C levels. End of story. If this ends in another fine to put into a ledger book I'll scream. The fine ends up back in their pockets in months in the form of loans and grants and tax avoidances and so on. The world no longer needs Facebook and its leaders. It does not need its technology. It does not need the ideas of the people that are there. If you are still working there, you are complicit in acting in a company that is actively seeking to control a populous. I understand it's hard not to work for "big tech" and not work for a company trying to control populous. So yes. I agree. Stop letting them play games with the rules we spent generations putting in place to protect our citizenship.

dylan604 2mo ago
> If this ends in another fine to put into a ledger book I'll scream. Get your pillow ready, because this is the only thing that'll happen if the verdict goes against them. Of course, the verdict could go the other way so no fine is levied at all. Maybe get a second pillow just in case
- abirch 2mo ago
  Buy a copy of Careless People to read between the tears.
  - rhyperior 2mo ago
    Fascinating story. The author was hopelessly ignorant and guilty of facilitating, but the execs were so devoid of anything approaching ethics or morality. Explains a lot if true.
    - SoftTalker 2mo ago
      Unless you've been on the inside at the top levels of huge companies, you don't know about the sheer sociopathy of the people there. It's easy, even normal, to be naive as a regular employee, even one at a fairly high management level.

consensus1 2mo ago

So you want them to be held responsible when kids use their platform, but you don't want them to be able to prevent kids from using it?