Skip Navigation

User banner
The Nexus of Privacy
Posts
27
Comments
51
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I'll get to that in a followon post, but one straightforward way to make progress is to change some of the defaults

  • As I say in the article:

    Despite these problems, many people on well-moderated instances have very positive experiences in today's fediverse. Especially for small-to-medium-size instances, for experienced moderators even Mastodon's tools can be good enough.

    However, many instances aren't well-moderated. So many people have very negative experiences in today's fediverse.

  • From https://www.stopkosa.com/

    First, KOSA would pressure platforms to install filters that would wipe the net of anything deemed “inappropriate” for minors. This = instructing platforms to censor, plain and simple. Places that already use content filters have restricted important information about suicide prevention and LGBTQ+ support groups, and KOSA would spread this kind of censorship to every corner of the internet. It’s no surprise that anti-rights zealots are excited about KOSA: it would let them shut down websites that cover topics like race, gender, and sexuality.

    Second, KOSA would ramp up the online surveillance of all internet users by expanding the use of age verification and parental monitoring tools. Not only are these tools needlessly invasive, they’re a massive safety risk for young people who could be trying to escape domestic violence and abuse.

    Here's more on how the Heritage Foundation says they'll use it to censor LGBTQ content, and about how KOSA denies young people freedoms of expression and privacy

  • This thread is talking about a US-based law, so I shared EFF's perspectives on national IDs in the US. For a more international view, check out Why ID https://www.accessnow.org/campaign/whyid/ -- which they've signed along with dozens of other civil society organizations.

    It's true that there are potential upsides of national ID systems as well as downsides. But as that Why ID letter says, "the scalability of digital identity programmes also makes their harms scalable. It is far from being proven that most digital identity programmes have brought additional benefits to users, without placing them at risk." You're right that private implementations have similar issues -- data brokers and tech companies are as careless with data as government agencies are, and just as eager to abuse people's privacy. But there are also some big differences: a national ID is mandatory, and the government has much more of an ability to put you in jail or deny you your rights.

  • Within the privacy community, EFF's viewed as pragmatists -- far from absolutists or extremists. So I agree with @chakan2@chakan2@lemmy.world, it only gets regarded as extreme because big tech and the surveillance-industrial complex have normalized not expecting privacy.

  • That's one of the concerns. Here's more, from https://www.eff.org/issues/national-ids

    Mandatory national ID cards violate essential civil liberties. They increase the power of authorities to reduce your freedoms to those granted by the card. If a national ID is required for employment, you could be fired and your employer fined if you fail to present your papers. People without ID cards can be denied the right to purchase property, open a bank account or receive government benefits. National identity systems present difficult choices about who can request to see an ID card and for what purpose. Mandatory IDs significantly expand police powers. Police with the authority to demand ID is invariably granted the power to detain people who cannot produce one. Many countries lack legal safeguards to prevent abuse of this power.

    Historically, national ID systems have been used to discriminate against people on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion and political views. The use of national IDs to enforce immigration laws invites discrimination that targets minorities. There is little evidence to support the argument that national IDs reduce crime. Instead, these systems create incentives for identity theft and widespread use of false identities by criminals. National ID cards allow different types of identifying information stored in different databases to be linked and analyzed, creating extreme risks to data security. Administration of ID programs are often outsourced to unaccountable companies. Private sector security threat models assume that at any one time, one per cent of company employees are willing to sell or trade confidential information for personal gain.

  • WTF indeed. But, thanks for emailing them -- they track how much email they get in each direction, and if there's enough they may rethink their position.

  • Agreed. At the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, both Cantwell and Markey said they had heard from a lot of consituents about the bill's problems, especially for LGBTQ+ people, and that there's work to do before going forward ... so at least the pushback is getting noticed.

  • Thanks for making the effort! On bills like this, enough pressure can make a difference -- we stopped KOSA from passing last year, and have a good chance this year as well.

  • Great point about editing the letter -- and calling is even better!

    In terms of whether or not we'll be able to change it ... last year the broad pushback succeeded in stopping KOSA, and there's certainly a decent chance to do the same this year. Who knows, but as you say, it's always worth trying!

  • It's just a list of Senators, I don't think there's an equivalent bill yet in the House.

  • That's disappointing ... but, enough pressure can get them to change their position (or, almost as good, ask Schumer not to bring the bill to the floor so that they don't have to take a politically costly vote). In the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, both Cantwell and Markey voted yes but said they had gotten a lot of calls and email from constituents who were concerned about the impact on LGBTQ+ teens so there was work to do before bringing the bill to the floor ... so the pressure is definitely getting noticed!

  • here's the list of cosponsors ... if they're there, then they're certainly supporting it. It's worth contacting them in any case; they'll often send you a form reply saying their position on the bill.

  • Yes, I completely agree. In some ways it's even worse from the Democrats who claim to be progressive and support LGBTQ+ rights.

  • politics @lemmy.world

    Republicans Are Fooling Democrats on Kids’ Online Safety (US)

  • Yep. But more positively, in the Senate Commerce Committee markup ten days ago, both Cantwell and Markey mentioned that they've gotten a lot of calls from constituents with concerns that will need to be addressed going forward, and specifically mentioned about issues for LGBTQ+ people. So that's encouraging ... we just need to keep the pressure up.

  • Politics @beehaw.org

    Republicans Are Fooling Democrats on Kids’ Online Safety (US)

    Technology @beehaw.org

    How the Kids Online Safety Act puts us all at risk (US-specific)

    Politics @beehaw.org

    ‘Pass It, Pass It, Pass It, Pass It, Pass It,’ President Biden Says About A Bill The GOP Says Will Be Useful To Silence LGBTQ Voices

    Technology @lemmy.world

    The NDAA is No Place for Sweeping Internet Legislation Like the STOP CSAM Act

    Privacy @lemmy.ml

    Can the Fediverse Help Stop Bad Internet Bills? (US focused)

    Technology @lemmy.world

    Can the Fediverse Help Stop Bad Internet Bills? (US focused)