shaicolemanMeta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act
https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rshc1f/i_traced_2_b...
https://github.com/upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings
These discussions remind me so much of the US discussions about federal ID documents as verification.
There's a vocal portion of people which opposes any solution because "privacy, government overreach, surveillance ...". So instead of a solution like e.g. zero-proof age verification, that tries to minimize intrusions on privacy, the result is the worst of all worlds, maximum surveillance (but I guess it's ok if it is not the federal government, but meta), with minimum utility. Just look at the freaking mess that is trying to proof your identity in the US.
Please explain how opposition to privacy invasive solutions result in even more privacy invasive solutions being implemented? Is it purely out of spite from the lawmakers? This logic doesn't follow.
Ignoring the reality that some system of age (and ID verification, for certain tasks) system is desired by a significant portion of the population, and does have utility (despite the shouts for "just parent your children") is simply sticking your head in the sand. So by opposing any solution (even solutions that preserve privacy, like zero-knowledge), you make privacy concerns seem unreasonable and weaken stances opposing the more privacy invasive solutions.
> Ignoring the reality that some system of age ... system is desired by a significant portion of the population
How do you think this came to be?
Do you have a source for that? Does your source imply that this is desired by the population?
My question is mostly rhetorical: it is obvious that government & safety institutions are themselves fanning the flames of this ridiculous movement away from privacy and towards a surveillance state of over-protectionism. The world has not significantly changed in 50 years in terms of terrorist threats, (except for, ironically, threats to your identity online), yet suddenly now that we can track people online, we must to combat this non-changing threat factor? It's all security theater.
All intelligence agencies benefit from more data, and will happily use lack of data as a scapegoat for their own incompetence. They instill fear to justify their existence, unlawful behavior, and lack of results.