While this bill is technically an alternative to the Kids Online Safety Act, it is a bad one. As we’ve said before, no one should have to hand over their driver’s license just to access free websites. Having to hand over that driver’s license to a government program doesn’t solve the problem. The world envisioned by the authors of this bill is one where everyone has less power to speak out and access information online, and we must oppose it.

A new bill sponsored by Sen. Schatz (D-HI), Sen. Cotton (R-AR), Sen. Murphy (D-CT), and Sen. Britt (R-AL) would combine some of the worst elements of various social media bills aimed at “protecting the children” into a single law.

    • @Eximius@lemmy.ltEnglish
      -4•1 year ago

      That is quite a twist to use severely out-dated examples for the modern world of today.

      The technology for mass data analysis is here and make no mistake all data about you is there in an NSA computer folder.

      The question is, why the fuck can’t the government give you a nation-backed digitally-verifiable ID number for you that is useful for you, when they have one of you anyway, because they gave you a passport/driving licence.

      • @MajorHavoc@lemmy.worldEnglish
        8•1 year ago

        Dismissing the holocaust as an “out-dated example” is actually a crime in some places, for good reasons.

        In case you’re asking in earnest, I can assure you that the technical risks are much bigger today than they were in the past, in most of the world. Exfiltration by third parties, illegal sales, and one-sided terms-of-use are big issues today.

        The government certainly can give me a centralized ID and not cause any problems. But for those who think it’ll automatically be fine - it’s worth reading some history.

        Some countries have the necessary culture and laws to make a centralized government tracked ID reasonably safe. Many do not.

        We would each be wise to stay aware of which we reside in.

        • @Eximius@lemmy.ltEnglish
          2•1 year ago

          Nowhere am I dismissing the holocaust.

          The example given in the wikipedia article is one small part of the holocaust, while helpful for Nazi efforts, if it did not exist, it would have had 0 ideological hindrance, and most likely would have been managed in some other (maybe less efficient) way, not with IBM punch-cards specifically. I would say it is a bad and irrelevant example. Especially since the world has gone quite a bit away from “out-dated” punch-cards.

          I am arguing that having a digitally-verifiable ID has 0 impact on the country’s ability for surveilliance of you, since it does that without it, without much hindrance.

          A digitally-verifiable ID only impacts your ability to prove your identity online. That’s really all. And lack of it is just one symptom of an anti-progressive (whether slow, or inept, or purposely obtuse) country government.