The Kids Online Safety Act is Still A Huge Danger to Our Rights Online.::Congress has resurrected the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), a bill that would increase surveillance and restrict access to information in the name of protecting children online. KOSA was introduced in 2022 but failed to gain traction, and today its authors, Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and…

    • Zeron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nothing. Policy makers are just using their “think of the children” defense to constantly push more and more overreaching policy.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      We gave up on parental responsibility when deregulation, deunionization and Reaganomics forced all adults into the workforce.

      Now that we’ve driven families to dysfunction, even CWS is underbudgeted with an impacted caseload. So they’ll let child abuse slide so long as the kid’s not infested with lice and scabies.

  • TheOSINTguy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If this passes I could see Tor usage and VPN uses rising. Not to also mention something like this would be hard to enforce and would face some backlash.

        • demlet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not an expert by any stretch, but couldn’t they force your ISP to just shut off your internet if you use a VPN? Maybe I don’t understand how it actually works well enough.

          • Irisos@lemmy.umainfo.live
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            They could implement restrictions to block VPN traffic. But that would be repealed as fast as it came when these very congressmen would phone angrily their district on why they can work from their million dollar home anymore.

            Support: Sorry VPNs are now blocked and you cannot work remotely without them

            Congressman: Who are the idiots that voted for these laws

            Support: Well, you and your friends

            • demlet@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ha, and you don’t think Congress would write in an exception for them and their wealthy donors? I’m surprised anyone in the US believes fairness is on the table anymore.

              • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                There’s money to be made by requiring VPN companies to meet minimum requirements that few companies can actually meet or are willing to. Backdoors for example.

        • demlet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          More like a next move. If I remember correctly, there was language in the TikTok bill a while back that would have effectively made using a VPN illegal. Maybe I’m misremembering that. I have no doubt there are people who want to make it happen.

          • Petter1@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Companies relay on VPN to allow remote work while protecting their IP. But maybe it’s only about VPN to/from foreign servers.

    • MrHand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      What makes you think they aren’t going to come after that too? The whole point is for elites to retain narrative control and bring the whole internet their grip so Donald Trump types never get elected again.

      • twack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Donald trump was never elected by the people in the first place, and he abused a ridiculous system created to fluff up the power of states with comparatively few people living in them. When that didn’t work the second time around, he started a misinformation campaign and flat out attempted to undermine the democracy our nation is built upon in multiple ways.

        Including him in your comment destroys your otherwise excellent point, because the Donald is exactly the type of person that would abuse this system to censor information he didn’t like.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Until we have free (tax-paid¹) school lunches and comprehensive child healthcare, until our kids are not commonly impoverished and skipping meals, I don’t buy into protect the children bills. The federal government wants to protect plutocrats and the established hierarchy, and has not two fucks to rub together to give regarding US children.

    ¹ Our taxes also pay for fields of unused tanks, laser planes, and active camouflage development all of which cost way more than comprensive child welfare programs ever could. And thats before we get into fossil fuel and automotive industry subsidizes. The federal government already is spending grocery money on Funko POP and pogs.

    • ilmagico@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not sure if I understand your comment, or if it’s sarcasm … but did you forget you were once a kid? Were you a danger? Edit: instead of downvoting could you please explain what you mean? I truly don’t understand the comment

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        People using “won’t someone please think of the children” arguments causes our rights to become restricted. The comment is a joke about this.

        • ilmagico@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Thank you! Unfortunately I’ve seen enough people unironically saying stuff like this, that I can never be sure anymore

  • skymtf@pricefield.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Whenever the feds say “protect the children” I know they are lying. This bill is dangerous and a danger to multiple communities. If it passes ID checks will become a thing, and guess what. ID checks will likely use Web Environment Integrity to verify if your OS is “secure” before allowing you to scan your ID. This bill is a fuck you to adults, Linux users, and queer people!

  • MrHand@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    We live in the era of brute internet censorship. For example, I identify with incels and all their spaces were “shut down.” DHS set up honeypot forums in their place. Yet when incels were being out and out censored across the web, no one said anything. The excuse was “fighting domestic extremism.” They’ll come after the rest of the internet until “they” can always have narrative control.

    • ilmagico@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not that I agree with much of “incel culture”, so to say, but you’re right about censorship. The whole idea of freedom of speech is that people should be free to express their thoughts even when we disagree with them.

      As long as it doesn’t become harassment or inciting violence… there are limits after all, but I do believe both the left and the right are pushing more and more censorship, they just disagree in what should be censored.

      • MrHand@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        When I posted on the web forum incels.is, to my surprise and shock I learned that it was a DHS operation. The feds there themselves encourage extremist rhetoric. Just imagine how unfair this is. They haven’t publicly announced that they are censoring incels but have in fact done so. They then set up honeypot forums where feds larp as incels and feed the public image of incels as one of extremism and violence. A user ends up there thinking this is what incel culture is and then gets subject to being put on a watchlist. It’s the government itself calling for censorship and restrictions on free speech, something I know all too well given my incels.is (run by DHS) experience.

        • antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Man, who are you kidding? I’ve seen incel culture in its infancy like a decade ago on 4chan and it has always been extremist.

        • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You forgot to include the part where you claim government agents rented the apartment above and next to you and then used sound devices to deprive you of sleep until you lost your job.

          • MrHand@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That did happen. Could be just schizo though. Feds would never be so hateful.

          • MrHand@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            yes, my schizo mind thought it was under “intrusive monitoring” under the “Countering Violent Extremism” program aimed at domestic dissidents. My schizo mind reached the conclusion that feds – in order to better monitor me – rented apartments next to mine. What a preposterous thing to believe, only a schizo would think feds would do that.

            • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hey I never called you anything, but it’s quite the logical leap to believe that the federal government is spending millions of dollars to monitor you 24/7 and mess with you mentally/physically for leaving some innocuous comments online. If they’re doing that to you, then they must be doing it to everyone else that commented on these forums, no? Wouldn’t that require tens of thousands of people dedicated to doing nothing else but that? Do any agencies even employ that many people (in addition to the people doing their regular job duties)?

              My intention here is nothing more than to help you see this from an outside perspective and reason your way through the situation.