Comment

Comment on No, the UK’s Online Safety Act Doesn’t Make Children Safer Online

chromodynamic@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

I saw an interesting video suggesting that the real motivation is to give megacorps like Google a new business acting as "banks" for identity, i.e. the Internet would get so inconvenient that people would just save their identity with Google (or Meta, etc) and then use them to log in to other websites.

I probably explained it badly, but the video I saw is here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAd-OOrdyMw

People in the comments pointed out that those companies would also have the ability to delete or suspend your identity verification if you did something they didn't like (or refused to do something they wanted). Reminds me of the SIN from Shadowrun .

source

Sort:hotnew top

Jason2357@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Indeed. Anybody but the biggies will have an impossible task trying to convince people to verify their ID, so all the smaller sites will switch to only allowing registration/sign-in through Google/Apple/MS’s Oauth, and depreciate the username/password option. When “signing in with Google/whatever”, Google will simply pass a flag “adult” along with authorizing. In the end, they become the gatekeepers for the whole web, collecting tremendous valuable data in the process and gaining even more power over your identity.

Always keep in mind that the small players will always take the easiest option, and the big players want more control.

source
- rozodru@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  Bingo. they’ll just tack it on to what they currently have with most sites that have you sign in with your google/apple/meta account. mask it as the easier option instead of using another email/registering an account on your own.
  
  And they won’t just stop on websites. Google will also incorporate this with your phone. FRP will now require you have a valid ID with Google, same with account recovery OR simply signing into a new device with your existing Google Account.
  
  Hell wouldn’t surprise me if Microsoft roles out that you must have a valid ID simply to install windows. Already requires users to have a Microsoft account and be online to install it, what’s to stop them from now requiring you provide a photo ID?
  
  source
  - 0x0@lemmy.zip ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    
    your existing Google Account.
    
    I don’t have one. Obtanium, Fdroid and Aurora ftw.
    
    source
- Darleys_Brew@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  Facebook are the same, been the same for years.
  
  source
Blackmist@feddit.uk ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Yeah, but the governments obviously want to know exactly what you’re doing as well.

I think their only objection to Google et al having so much data is that they need to jump through hoops to get hold of it.

I suspect this will be in browser before too long. Mostly so they can automatically provide your full unique ID code to anyone who asks, so your government can keep track of you if you say “I support Palestine Action” anywhere, or so Google can look it up when you dare suggest AI is not our glorious future.

But also because there’s only so many “let us check your ID” services you can use before you end up giving your details to somebody who is going to sell them directly. How long before a dodgy porn site does a “show us your face” check, before generating deepfakes starring yourself and demanding payment not to send them to a social media profile it’s already detected based on your face?

I don’t really want to be on an internet where instead of blackmist@feddit.uk, somebody can just click that and go “Oh, that’s Jeff Timmons of 48 Badminton Way, Stoke-on-Trent. Ring Staffordshire police so they can go and grab him”

source
SethTaylor@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
This is by far the most plausible theory.

source
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
The other part is that christofascists really want to ban “porn” (read: anything they don’t like), and they know age verification will make their operation almost impossible. The fact that corporations like Google might get to validate people they advertise to is a positive side effect.

source
FishFace@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
This isn’t the motivation in Europe where there’s a deep skepticism about those - all foreign - companies.

There is no need for conspiracy-type thinking. “Think of the children” has always been a powerful and real motivating force, not just a cover for nefarious other stuff. You need to recognise that, even if it’s wrong-headed.

source
- Senal@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  It being a real and powerful motivational force means it’s one of the more useful covers.
  
  Just because it motivates the voters/customers doesn’t mean it’s the genuine reason behind a decision.
  
  I cannot think of a single recent “think of the children” based action that was intended to and actually helped the children in a meaningful way.
  
  Can you?
  
  source
  - FishFace@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    
    I cannot think of a single recent “think of the children” based action that was intended to and actually helped the children in a meaningful way.
    
    Are you judging the motivation purely based on the effects? Otherwise, how are you working out what goes on inside people’s heads?
    
    I think given that we all agree that there are voters who think this will protect children makes it crazy to think that politicians must somehow know better. It is well-accepted online that politicians are out-of-touch when it comes to technology, so it’s not like they understand the subject of this article.
    
    source
    petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    
    politicians must somehow know better.
    
    No, no, the accusation is that politicians are lying.
    
    Let’s phrase this another way. Asking every single website in existence to implement and maintain an ID database and monitoring system is expensive, yes? So, why wouldn’t private companies shift some of this responsibility off to a 3rd party who specializes specifically in this service?
    
    If I were google, I would:
    
    One, be very excited about tying a user’s account analytics to their government personhood; can’t multiple-credit-cards your way out of that one.
    
    And two, already be looking at my own 3rd-party user login service as a means of beating out all competition in this space.
    
    The only thing left to do is lobby. Politicians might not have this vision, but they do understand really expensive dinners.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
    Senal@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    
    Are you judging the motivation purely based on the effects? Otherwise, how are you working out what goes on inside people’s heads?
    
    A combination of the effects, the prior actions, reactions and consequences of the subject and others in similar categories/contexts (to the extent i actually know/pay attention).
    
    I don’t know of another way of performing predictive analysis.
    
    Also that didn’t answer the question.
    
    I think given that we all agree that there are voters who think this will protect children makes it crazy to think that politicians must somehow know better. It is well-accepted online that politicians are out-of-touch when it comes to technology, so it’s not like they understand the subject of this article.
    
    I’m genuinely not sure what you are saying here, but i’ll go line by line, tell me if I’m reading it incorrectly.
    
    I think given that we all agree that there are voters who think this will protect children makes it crazy to think that politicians must somehow know better.
    
    I don’t know what this means, there are voters who genuinely believe this, yes, i think i follow that bit.
    
    I’m not sure what you think is crazy here (i’m not disagreeing, i just don’t understand) , do you mean to say the politicians do or don’t know better ?
    
    It is well-accepted online that politicians are out-of-touch when it comes to technology, so it’s not like they understand the subject of this article.
    
    This i agree with, i can also anecdotally add first hand experience of the consequences of such lack of understanding.
    
    Not sure how it ties in to the other sentence though.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments