retrospectology@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 18:52
nextcollapse
Bipartisan is a really bad sign. My money says this is not going to be aimed at actually addressing the underlying profit motive that drives big tech to purposefully promote misery through their algorithm designs, instead it will be further restriction on users freedoms and privacy.
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 19:10
collapse
That’s how broken democracy has become - bipartisan legislation is not a good indicator that a bill is uncontroversial and useful.
bizarroland@fedia.io
on 30 Jul 2024 19:45
collapse
Given that they have pushed this bill I don't know like what is this the sixth go round, I'm sure that there is actually nothing good in this bill for the average American internet user.
At the same time I'm sure it'll be very good for the average American corporate technological oligopoly.
scottmeme@sh.itjust.works
on 30 Jul 2024 19:00
nextcollapse
<_<
“PrOtEcT tHe ChIlDrEn!!!?!!!”
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 19:04
nextcollapse
Any time a bill claims to be about protecting children, 10/10 times it’s actually hiding something more sinister that has nothing to do with that. I don’t trust this.
sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 19:51
nextcollapse
The Crypto Wars have never ended. Governments dream of a world without public access to encryption and privacy. And many government attacks on encryption are done “for the children”.
Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 20:38
nextcollapse
You’d be right in this case too. It’s extremely sketchy, it’s pretty much absolute censorship power with only an informal promise that it won’t be used for anything nefarious (but a refusal to actually codify anything preventing that). “Harmful content” is left very conveniently vague.
admin@lemmy.my-box.dev
on 31 Jul 2024 08:54
collapse
Can you elaborate on that claim? I couldn’t find anything substantial in the article.
if they decide that treating the “transgendereds” like people is “harmful to children” then it’ll be banned.
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 2024 07:27
collapse
It just addresses some stuff that legit sounds nice out of context, and it’s also covered in the “protect the children” package, so if you’re not voting on it, you want to put the children into danger. Same with the Hungarian anti-LGBT bill.
asdfwqer1234wqer@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 19:16
nextcollapse
If anything we need bills to prevent media companies from controlling our national dialectics.
If this is only used to default user profiles into “Safe” modes and add additional tools for personal filtering then great. I’m betting on further malicious action by the government until people start taking responsibility and forcing our public officials to account for their actions.
wesker@lemmy.sdf.org
on 30 Jul 2024 19:21
nextcollapse
As if we didn’t need more reason to return to snolnet values and small, self-hosted communities and comms.
isles@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 20:08
nextcollapse
nia_the_cat@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 20:21
collapse
Also for anyone scrolling by, that EFF page contains a tool in the “Take Action” button that can find your relevant representative and provide you with an email template that you can personalize and they will send on your behalf. (also has a link to a guide on the tool page to find and contact your representatives if you don’t want to trust their tool)
"Protect the kid" = daddy gonna stick a finger in your butt-hole, if any resistance will be supressed with coercive power of the state.
Enjoy!
randon31415@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 2024 20:52
nextcollapse
Not one mention of the word “KOSA” in the article, had to check if this is the “appoint one person in the commerce department and have their definition of ‘harmful’ be what the government now can totally ban from the united states internet” bill.
If Trump wins, “harmful” will be defined as any mention online that the United States use to be a democracy instead of a kingship.
qevlarr@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 2024 06:16
nextcollapse
This is why I teach my kids to lie they are grown ups on the internet. Fuck big tech deciding what is and isn’t appropriate for my kids, with no way to override it as a parent. Their legal department CYA policies interest do not align with my and my kids’ interest.
Moreover, they’re fighting the previous war. The real needs of me and my children to be safe online, aren’t about porn and swearing. It’s about death threats and doxxing, about scammers trying to get your passwords. Here’s the thing: That has NOTHING to do with being a minor. EVERYONE needs those protections. Big tech is intentionally focusing attention on children so they can keep getting away with spending zero dollars on stopping bad actors
Mwa@thelemmy.club
on 31 Jul 2024 07:39
nextcollapse
its not gonna stop the weird people completely
schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
on 31 Jul 2024 08:31
collapse
the worst laws in the US are always supported by both parties
threaded - newest
Bipartisan is a really bad sign. My money says this is not going to be aimed at actually addressing the underlying profit motive that drives big tech to purposefully promote misery through their algorithm designs, instead it will be further restriction on users freedoms and privacy.
That’s how broken democracy has become - bipartisan legislation is not a good indicator that a bill is uncontroversial and useful.
Given that they have pushed this bill I don't know like what is this the sixth go round, I'm sure that there is actually nothing good in this bill for the average American internet user.
At the same time I'm sure it'll be very good for the average American corporate technological oligopoly.
<_<
“PrOtEcT tHe ChIlDrEn!!!?!!!”
Any time a bill claims to be about protecting children, 10/10 times it’s actually hiding something more sinister that has nothing to do with that. I don’t trust this.
The Crypto Wars have never ended. Governments dream of a world without public access to encryption and privacy. And many government attacks on encryption are done “for the children”.
You’d be right in this case too. It’s extremely sketchy, it’s pretty much absolute censorship power with only an informal promise that it won’t be used for anything nefarious (but a refusal to actually codify anything preventing that). “Harmful content” is left very conveniently vague.
Can you elaborate on that claim? I couldn’t find anything substantial in the article.
if they decide that treating the “transgendereds” like people is “harmful to children” then it’ll be banned.
It just addresses some stuff that legit sounds nice out of context, and it’s also covered in the “protect the children” package, so if you’re not voting on it, you want to put the children into danger. Same with the Hungarian anti-LGBT bill.
If anything we need bills to prevent media companies from controlling our national dialectics.
If this is only used to default user profiles into “Safe” modes and add additional tools for personal filtering then great. I’m betting on further malicious action by the government until people start taking responsibility and forcing our public officials to account for their actions.
As if we didn’t need more reason to return to snolnet values and small, self-hosted communities and comms.
The EFF isn’t a fan and various other rights orgs have worked against KOSA.
Also for anyone scrolling by, that EFF page contains a tool in the “Take Action” button that can find your relevant representative and provide you with an email template that you can personalize and they will send on your behalf. (also has a link to a guide on the tool page to find and contact your representatives if you don’t want to trust their tool)
Ha I sent a letter to my representative about this a while ago and got back a reply that amounted to “thanks but we don’t care”
I’ve sent in ~50 letters to my reps and none have had even a canned response. They really don’t care.
"Protect the kid" = daddy gonna stick a finger in your butt-hole, if any resistance will be supressed with coercive power of the state.
Enjoy!
Not one mention of the word “KOSA” in the article, had to check if this is the “appoint one person in the commerce department and have their definition of ‘harmful’ be what the government now can totally ban from the united states internet” bill.
If Trump wins, “harmful” will be defined as any mention online that the United States use to be a democracy instead of a kingship.
It will be closer and closer to the great firewall of the US.
“For the kids”…LMAO.
Well that is a terrifying headline.
…Well fuck.
That’s a nice way of saying “the kind of censorship that will destroy the internet as we know it”
<img alt="" src="https://sh.itjust.works/pictrs/image/9e1708f6-be7f-4d40-a9b0-4804218afbd4.png">
This is why I teach my kids to lie they are grown ups on the internet. Fuck big tech deciding what is and isn’t appropriate for my kids, with no way to override it as a parent. Their legal department CYA policies interest do not align with my and my kids’ interest.
Moreover, they’re fighting the previous war. The real needs of me and my children to be safe online, aren’t about porn and swearing. It’s about death threats and doxxing, about scammers trying to get your passwords. Here’s the thing: That has NOTHING to do with being a minor. EVERYONE needs those protections. Big tech is intentionally focusing attention on children so they can keep getting away with spending zero dollars on stopping bad actors
its not gonna stop the weird people completely
the worst laws in the US are always supported by both parties