by tolerance
5 subcomments
- What percentage of this is lawslop?
https://github.com/righttoprivacyact/bill/tree/main/tests
There’s clearly a non-trivial level of LLM involvement.
I want to say 100% lawslop. I can’t figure out who’s behind this to ascertain their qualifications and acumen in the space.
100% seems like a safe place to start speculating from but I can be talked down.
- Of course, I’m absolutely for this. It is way overdue. But, what’s the group behind this? Who’s pushing it?
I haven’t read through the bill and text yet, but credibility is important in this fight. Plus, this can change at anytime, so knowing who’s behind it amplifies the trust.
We need to be having these conversations yesterday. Our fundamental freedoms are under attack, and a bill like this would go a long way to protecting future generations
- The bill bans making access to a service contingent on consent. This would kill Gmail, Google Maps, Facebook, Instagram and basically every other ad supported service. Making subscriptions the only consumer business model would be bad imo.
by tangotaylor
0 subcomment
- Upvoted because I like the effort and I want more visibility on this subject.
But I also don’t want to step on the EFF’s toes. They’ve been doing good work on this area for decades and I’d prefer we work with them on policy details.
Here’s a whitepaper on their policy positions:
https://www.eff.org/wp/privacy-first-better-way-address-onli...
- I appreciate the sentiment, but this doesn't really seem to put itself in the context of the state of play at the federal level. Namely, pro-privacy states have existing legislation they want to be the 'floor' of privacy protections, and anti-privacy states want to use a federal bill to preempt those laws, making the federal law the ceiling that they can lower in one fell swoop. There are real risks to a federal law that preempts state legislation.
- We have to try.
- Privacy advocates, UNITE!
Just leave your name and email on this contact form on github, so privacy can be solved once and for all!
(/s, but an interesting paradox for pro-privacy initiatives soliciting identifiable public support)
- Defining a picture of your government id not being a sufficient credential for… well anything would probably be enough to kill all these age verification laws and might get some traction legislatively if you frame it right.
It has the benefit of being literally true, whoever thought the was necessary to have a bunch of hard to forge security measures on IDs which require physical inspection probably wouldn't be okay with easily faked scans being accepted.
- Does anyone know what this part means?
> Require Social Security Numbers to authenticate preventing fraud.
There's a ton of stuff piled into the agenda on this page but that one in particular stumped me. Is it proposing that people (who?) are required to use their SSN to authenticate (for what?) or that the SSN agency is supposed to authenticate... something before doing something?
- I’m too cynical because at this point I can only believe this is to help billionaires and ICE hide their identities/money, or it’s to strip away all privacy (as bills are often named the opposite of their purpose).
by peter_d_sherman
0 subcomment
- Full text:
https://github.com/righttoprivacyact/bill/blob/main/bill/rig...
- >Update CAN-SPAM for one-click deletion of email addresses from databases.
Then how can I know not to send you another email if I don't have your email flagged in my database to do-not-send?
by burnt-resistor
1 subcomments
- The oligarchs would roll on the ground laughing at this cute desire from the plebs for a few crumbs. The system is so corrupt and bought, it doesn't matter if this passes or not because it will be diluted, unenforced, and/or overturned by a largely corrupt legislature, executive, and judiciary. All hopeful this time™ feel-good efforts will turn to shit until the corruption is sufficiently removed and prevented. No amount of idealist wishing, "trying", protesting, or campaigning for a single issue can materially change the reality of extremely corrupt, criminal elites having captured the important levers of power. That's reality. Therefore, the first order of business is fixing the corruption before all other single issue advocacy can be addressed.
- [dead]
by kevincloudsec
0 subcomment
- [dead]
- Haha. This will accomplish nothing, because the surveillance dragnet is built and used by the people themselves, who deliberately (ab)use the very technologies that enable this breach of privacy at scale. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
- Bold idea but too much money on the other side to let this gain traction
Hacker News