upvote

points

by madrox21 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby Geezus_4220 hours ago|
next
[-]
We could try investing in positive infrastructure that improves peoples life's in stead of creating the panopticon torment nexus. Things like third spaces where people can spend time is save spaces where they form communities and public transit so that people can get to those places. Incentivize positive behaviors instead of closing off public spaces and pricing more and more people out of being able to do anything with the minuscule amount of free time they have besides going on the internet.
reply
upvoteby madrox19 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
That sounds like a great idea, but I think we should also try to solve human trafficking online.
reply
upvoteby Geezus_4217 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Creating a surveillance state isn't going to solve human trafficing.
reply
upvoteby intended13 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
As the parent poster pointed out, doing nothing and pretending this doesn’t happen doesn’t fly anymore.

I guess, welcome to the middle age of tech? The part where you have to pick up the pieces and clean up the mess that you see around you.

reply
upvoteby izacus2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Allowing the relevant authorities to control, shut down and arrest serious crimes doesn't turn a country into a surveillance state.

Poor surveillance controls do though - let's perhaps fix those instead of allowing garbage like Flock to spread and then hand wring? EU started with GDPR, let's see others follow and build on it?

reply
upvoteby steve_taylor7 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
> including the half ass Australian solution.

It was designed to be half-arsed so Digital ID can come along and save the day. Australia's Digital ID opens up to the private sector on 30 November.

reply
upvoteby bigbuppo21 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
And yet as the article mentioned, the "problem" is a lie... an excuse to justify the surveillance state.
reply
upvoteby madrox20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I think the lie is to look at the problems we have that the internet has enabled and say "things are ok as they are don't try to do anything to solve it."
reply
upvoteby JoshTriplett7 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Things are, in fact, okay as they are, attempts to impose identity requirements would make things less okay, and people trying to claim they aren't okay need to be defeated.
reply
upvoteby izacus2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Putting your head in the sand from position of wealthy privilege doesn't change the reality.
reply
upvoteby JoshTriplett2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Oh, a great many things are broken and need fixing. "The internet doesn't have enough surveillance and deanonymization" is just not one of those things.
reply
upvoteby bigbuppo19 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
If the problem is "social media bad for kids" then any parent that allows their children to access social media is as guilty of abuse or neglect as a parent that lets them play in traffic. Throw the parents in prison and put the kids in foster care. Problem solved.
reply
upvoteby sdfsdfsd3443f11 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
People make problems where there are none. Parents all around me are giving smartphones to their eight year olds without supervision.

I have kids and no amount of bullshit is going to convince me this is necessary for social interaction of any kind. If anything the "phone kids" are the weird ones.

People are creating this problem. You can easily, very easily, say "no" to a kid. I pay to keep you bloody alive and I will defend your sanity with everything I got because these kids are our future. Being disliked or "hated" by them is the least of my worries. Are we adults or what?

Sometimes I think there is a severe lack of "adulting" lately. No amount of legislation will fix that.

reply
upvoteby bigbuppo5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Well, as I said, we figured out ways to make parents big-r Responsible by applying harsh penalties when they abuse or neglect their children. We spend countless billions on government agenices whose sole purpose is to intervene when parents fail their children. We should use this pre-existing system to deal with the problem of parents allowing their children to use social media.
reply
upvoteby madrox19 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
If you think any attempt at a solve goes immediately to 11, sure, but I hope you believe in nuance or else we’re all lost.
reply
upvoteby 7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby intended13 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
That is a bold statement to make, and I wonder how many more people would be willing to make the same statement whenever these conversations come up on HN.
reply