Apparently, US legislative efforts to erode freedom and increase tracking and surveillance under the bogus disguise of 'protecting children online' has now moved beyond the horrible privacy and speech restrictions that could already emanate from COPPA and KOSA alone into a package of legislative proposals. As usual, the package was introduced deliberately abusing the emotional appeal of "protecting children online." It is titled the "Kids Online Safety Package." This package needs to be stopped. We don't need digital ID and we definitely don't need it at the operating system level. Instead of COPPA and COSA, we need SOTA and SOSA, the "Stop Online Tracking" and "Stop Online Surveillance" Acts.
Excellent piece that removes the rational to introduce "child online safety" legislation. Stating what we all intuitively know: children do not need smartphones, laptops or video games, but they need to play outdoors, interact socially and learn in physical spaces:
Instead of abusing the emotional appeal of "protecting children online" and purporting to accomplish that through digital ID, the right step is to reduce digital exposure for children.
Steps to take should be: do not give under 16s access to smartphones. By consequence, ensure that not a single place can ask minors a QR code for access and make sure that cash is accepted always and in every business. Also, educate parents and make sure they have autonomy over their children to take away "smart," yet numbing devices from them.
Just a few months after KOSA was reintroduced, we now have the GUARD Act, a proposal to mandate identity verification for interaction with AI chatbots. Since the latter are integrated in almost every website, in practice this proposal intends to mandate digital ID for almost all online activity:
As usual, the need for a digital ID mandate is sold by abusing the emotional appeal to "protect children online," more specifically to not expose them to AI that talks them into committing suicide, as has recently tragically happened and is the matter of a high profile litigation.
Of course, there are many other ways in which we can stop AI from talking teenagers into committing suicide. Parallel to previous versions, this tragic incident must not be abused to roll out digital ID. Society has worked very well for millennia without digital ID and it will do so going forward as well.
The recent data leak at Discord underlines how digital ID can become a path to identity theft on steroids: if digital ID is required to access social media platforms (like Discord) and their data are breached, then users' unique state-'issued' digital ID can be used for any purpose by criminals.
Why do governments in countries like the EU, UK or Mexico insist that digital ID needs to be used to access certain services? Why doesn't a physical ID suffice? Because digital ID is more convenient, they say. For hackers it is more convenient for sure.
Apparently, US legislative efforts to erode freedom and increase tracking and surveillance under the bogus disguise of 'protecting children online' has now moved beyond the horrible privacy and speech restrictions that could already emanate from COPPA and KOSA alone into a package of legislative proposals. As usual, the package was introduced deliberately abusing the emotional appeal of "protecting children online." It is titled the "Kids Online Safety Package." This package needs to be stopped. We don't need digital ID and we definitely don't need it at the operating system level. Instead of COPPA and COSA, we need SOTA and SOSA, the "Stop Online Tracking" and "Stop Online Surveillance" Acts.
https://reclaimthenet.org/as-expected-a-hearing-on-kids-online-safety-becomes-a-blueprint-for-digital-id
Excellent piece that removes the rational to introduce "child online safety" legislation. Stating what we all intuitively know: children do not need smartphones, laptops or video games, but they need to play outdoors, interact socially and learn in physical spaces:
https://www.thefp.com/p/we-gave-students-laptops-and-took?utm_campaign=260347&utm_source=cross-post&r=1t2zrj&utm_medium=email
Instead of abusing the emotional appeal of "protecting children online" and purporting to accomplish that through digital ID, the right step is to reduce digital exposure for children.
Steps to take should be: do not give under 16s access to smartphones. By consequence, ensure that not a single place can ask minors a QR code for access and make sure that cash is accepted always and in every business. Also, educate parents and make sure they have autonomy over their children to take away "smart," yet numbing devices from them.
Just a few months after KOSA was reintroduced, we now have the GUARD Act, a proposal to mandate identity verification for interaction with AI chatbots. Since the latter are integrated in almost every website, in practice this proposal intends to mandate digital ID for almost all online activity:
https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/GUARD-Act-Bill-Text.pdf
As usual, the need for a digital ID mandate is sold by abusing the emotional appeal to "protect children online," more specifically to not expose them to AI that talks them into committing suicide, as has recently tragically happened and is the matter of a high profile litigation.
Of course, there are many other ways in which we can stop AI from talking teenagers into committing suicide. Parallel to previous versions, this tragic incident must not be abused to roll out digital ID. Society has worked very well for millennia without digital ID and it will do so going forward as well.
The recent data leak at Discord underlines how digital ID can become a path to identity theft on steroids: if digital ID is required to access social media platforms (like Discord) and their data are breached, then users' unique state-'issued' digital ID can be used for any purpose by criminals.
Why do governments in countries like the EU, UK or Mexico insist that digital ID needs to be used to access certain services? Why doesn't a physical ID suffice? Because digital ID is more convenient, they say. For hackers it is more convenient for sure.
https://reclaimthenet.org/discord-support-data-breach-exposes-user-ids-personal-data