Please remove the link to the youtube channel at the very bottom. It sdoes not seem to have anything to do with the rest of your post and looks like a conspiracy theory-mill. Otherwise I will have to remove the entire post, wich I'd prefer not to do.
Microblog Memes
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
RULES:
- Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
- Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
- You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
- Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
- Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If an image is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
- Absolutely no NSFL content.
- Be nice. Don't take anything personally. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements & arguments to private messages.
- No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.
RELATED COMMUNITIES:
The part that frustrates me the most about all of this is how it's a chess move towards a massive power-grab by the few and monied. What's more frustrating is how many people completely miss this, instead focusing on this first move.
We can argue the validity and the expense required in complying with such laws, especially the egregious "on every device" language. But that's not the point.
Up front, only the most powerful and well-connected will be able to comply and lobby for exceptions to this law. And the only feasible way to pull this off is with 100% cloud-connected devices that are already prepared to gather biometrics and basically stick a camera in your face. That means that Apple, Microsoft, every cellphone vendor, every cell network provider, are pre-selected as winners in this race. Anything else can't possibly come up to this level, and/or won't due to the obvious ethical conflicts it causes.
Looking at an even bigger picture, the problem sets up widespread de-facto censorship. It's surveillance and a cudgel for sites that don't participate in said surveillance, all in one.
We've already seen major social media consolidated and owned by the obscenely wealthy and powerful, who are nakedly well-connected with government. Requiring ID to use these sites effectively pushes anyone with a brain OUT of that space. Algorithms were already punching-down on our ability to coordinate and find common ground across the (largely artificially generated) political divide. Now, we're self-segregating and retreating to spaces like Lemmy. The proposed laws would make it much harder to start and maintain alternate media, and hosting an environment full of dissenting opinions would be well-documented and served to law enforcement on a silver platter if ID laws are adhered to. But if you don't comply? Be prepared to lose that whole site since it'll be illegal to do so.
Our company builds control devices for conferences. They are network accessable. So we would need some kind of age verification for a device that switches microphones on and off. Makes sense, does it?
(Sorry, I'm from Finland, I don't know much about the finer points.)
Well this is good. The folks in New York don't need to worry about mega noisy AI data centers in their backyards anymore!
Or any other kind of datacenters!
Or internet infrastructure as a whole!
ISPs will just have to chuck their gear in the Atlantic! No way they'll implement this shit for every single piece of gear. Because they know users won't put up with authorising themselves at every network hop through NY.
Let me quote a joke IT security exam from the late 1990s:
"Your computer has just received a packet from the network. What do you do? Do you need a sledgehammer or is a smaller hammer enough?"
This is what is ahead. Don't give in!
Any info about who is pushing this so hard right now? It seems too much of a coincidence that this seems to be pushed everywhere around the world atm. Makes me think it's not the usual incompentent police and secret service combination
Peter Thiel and Larry Ellison.
I don't think I want the Epstein class to have an easy way to determine who is (and therefore also isn't) an adult over the internet.
Nobody has proposed better ways to fight against malicious targeted misinformation.
Like, that's a big problem when everybody has a computer and internet connection and there's external forces trying to influence distrust, misinformation, and conspiracy theories to erode democratic values or topple a government. It's a problem that's only going to get worse with the current rise of LLMs.
We don't live in utopia.
We need better solutions for both progress and sustainability purposes. People on both Reddit and Lemmy love to circlejerk sarcastic jokes or doomer bullshit, but never want to discuss, propose, or crowdsource ideas.
What does everyone else got for solutions? Let's hear some critical thinking and ideas here - give it a try - think about a solution instead of bandwagoning.
Please explain how age verification fights malicious targeted misinformation.
It doesn't, nor did I propose that in any of my comments, if you've read them at all, which based on this comment, you absolutely haven't.
Internet verification is going to be a continual growing issue until we can solve how to regulate the internet as a whole, and the answer is, you cannot. Until we have real solutions to the problems it's trying to solve, we're going to get half cooked concepts like the ones proposed.
Now that I've answered your question, how about answering my proposed question in the original comment? Seriously, give it a try, it just take a little effort to think of an idea or ideas.
It seems like Lemmy is void of ideas though. Maybe folx are afraid of downvotes? They just don't even want to try.
The reason people are acting like you're a dick, is because you're asking questions which have already been answered and whose answers are already well known. It's the reason right wing nutters fight against education so hard.
That's fine, I don't mind the downvotes or being called names and I guess I'm dumb as fuck, so please educate me a bit here.
How are Nations fighting against online misinformation and protecting themselves from the intrusion of external sources posing as citizen to influence public opinion? What's the answer if it's not some system of online verification for at least some websites?
We don't live in utopia
okay so I have an idea... how about we just fucking regulate dis/misinformation and make the alphabet soup agencies do the jobs theyre supposed to be fucking doing instead of investigating Bad Bunny.
Who decides what is misinformation and how do we regulate that on international websites?
Disingenuous argument from the jump. International websites can very easily be blocked (see- the great firewall)
and acting like we've never had a nonpartisan committee to decided if things are false is wild.
International websites can very easily be blocked
Can be, but should they be? Is that what you're proposing as a solution? What about social media which is also international?
Again, with the disingenuous arguments. You're shifting language here to work for you. You know damn good and well we are talking about misinformation. Why would international websites with good information be blocked?
How about you come up with something better, since you're so damn good at finding "holes" in other peoples proposals.
I'm was not poking holes in your arguments, I'm asking questions. Questions aren't arguments or statements.
I'm not against a "Great Firewall" for each Nation, that's not a bad idea at all.
Why would international websites with good information be blocked?
There's no feasible way to determine that without also having a "Great Acceptable List of Websites".
^^^ That's poking a hole in your argument.
How about you come up with something better,
I did, see my comment on the original as linked here
The bill is about requiring age verification
It doesn’t, nor did I propose that in any of my comments,
but, ya did
Nobody has proposed better ways to fight against malicious targeted misinformation.
So you want ideas:
until we can solve how to regulate the internet as a whole,
I'd argue that it doesn't need regulation "as a whole". We've been running for decades with light-touch admin just where it's necessary. Why do we now need full-on authoritarian control? What changed? When someone makes a place that's targeted at kids, they need to police it. AI is fully capable of reading every conversation had on roblox and identifying adults trying to stalk kids. Roblox could afford to use teams of people or AI to keep all this at bay.
The bill is about requiring age verification
I'm not referring to the specific bill but the problem as a whole that is online verification and moderating misinformation. This kind of online verification has been kicked around for almost a decade now, it's not new.
It doesn’t, nor did I propose that in any of my comments, but, ya did
By all means, quote me where I supported that proposal then; otherwise you're wrong and you just don't want to admit it (which is just, classic online discussions)
I’d argue that it doesn’t need regulation “as a whole”. We’ve been running for decades with light-touch admin just where it’s necessary. Why do we now need full-on authoritarian control? What changed? When someone makes a place that’s targeted at kids, they need to police it. AI is fully capable of reading every conversation had on roblox and identifying adults trying to stalk kids. Roblox could afford to use teams of people or AI to keep all this at bay.
It's been running for a decade with light-touch as both Corporations and Governments caught up to the technological changes of the century. Now all parties are caught up and understand how to grease the wheels of the algorithm, harvest data, and manipulate information to their benefit. It started to gain momentum around ~2014 and have been going from there. Once Musk bought Twitter and turned it into a propaganda machine is when the ecosystem changed for the worse IMO.
The issue of misinformation and manipulation of content by external sources is bigger than Roblox. LLMs are not yet sophisticated enough for both full moderation, misinformation control, and online verification.
This is way off the mark. Fascists were able to bring the world to its knees 50 years before the internet. We simply don't need any solution that you are referring to. Fascism does not need internet.
But Fascism can use Internet as a tool just as well.
Like, as a society we used to rely on local radio and local TV news.
Now it's all international websites and international social media. In 50 years, the field of information has changed and how society gets their information has changed. Non-Boomers are not getting their news and information from local sources anymore and external sources are certainly taking advantage of that.
It is a problem we, and every Nation world-wide, will need to face.
Quick binary question, simple Yes or No: Do you think governments around the world are using Social Media and The Internet as a whole to influence certain parts of other Nations society for their own gain (and/or to meet their own agendas)?
Yes
Great! So we can at least agree that this is a problem, now how do we solve it?
If we cannot regulate the internet as a whole, and you don't think we can trust our government(s) with verification information such as biometrics (gross), how do we as a society fight against this type of cyber-warfare? Something that could be implemented by every Nation.
You're literally the first person in this thread to answer a proposed question, big props.
You're right, we don't live in a utopia, so do you actually think the governments (since all governments seem to be doing some form of this) will not simply allow bots (bots are from companies, and neo-liberal governments will twist themselves into an inter dimensional pretzel if it pleases megacorps), foreign intervention (having a valid foreign ID doesn't atop people from astroturfing), etc?
They have more than a dozen ways to combat misinformation already and they actively choose not to use any of them at all because it meets their goals.
Do you think normal people will be able to access the IDs of anyone to see if they are astroturfing and spreading misinformation? Literally a 0.001% chance of that happening.
Literally the only thing that will happen is that normal people get tracked to hell and back and when the authoritarians manufacture enough consent to take power, it will immediately be used to dispose of their dissidents. Only bad comes from this because the democratic or socialist cleaning governments don't have the spine to actually use it against the billionaire class.
Cool, you didn't read my subcomment about a solution.
Yea, I'm going to trust my government over a external government pining for the same control and information, but/and also has malicious purposes.
so do you actually think the governments (since all governments seem to be doing some form of this) will not simply allow bots
The difference is that the sites are currently on Commercial TLDs. We either regulate all commercial TLDs in and outside the Nations domain or we regulate specific TLDs that live within the Nations grounds, on the Nations servers. How to regulate commercial websites has always been a sticky point because where is the line between what the entity can do with their website and what they cannot do? What about sites that transcend international bounds, whose jurisdiction is that?
Have a distinction between a Nations external websites and internal websites at least allows "easy" regulation while keeping it opt-in.
Do you think normal people will be able to access the IDs of anyone to see if they are astroturfing and spreading misinformation?
No, this is a system issue, not a user issue.
Literally the only thing that will happen is that normal people get tracked to hell and back and when the authoritarians manufacture enough consent to take power, it will immediately be used to dispose of their dissidents. Only bad comes from this because the democratic or socialist cleaning governments don’t have the spine to actually use it against the billionaire class.
Any country could already do this if they wanted to. They can strongarm ISPs, website admins, and OS manufacturers. This is especially true for countries that hold the keys to their systems like China, Russia, and the U.S.
How about answering one of my questions?
What do we do about other countries using social media and our mass access to open internet to sway opinions, elections, and sow distrust to erode democracy and undermine that countries government? Assume that long-term goals like education is not an option due to it being long-term.
My opinion is that each Nation needs an "internal" internet and an "external" internet.
Give websites .us and .ca TLDs which require authentication through their specific government identification systems. These are websites that not anyone could get, but would need to be registered, and filtered through whether the owner is a citizen of that nation and acting in good faith. The websites would have to run on that nations servers under that nations security.
Everything that isn't this, like Lemmy, would be external.
This gives the best of both worlds since it's opt-in but also allows you to visit and interact with websites where you know the users involved are both not bots or external aggravators.
That's my idea around this whole thing.
I’m getting tempted to go off the grid and just make do with meshstatic or such.
I refuse to live in a big brother world.
Reject modernity, embrace nature
So… this is really THE conversation. How do we roll the Internet back to around 1999? Obviously we include Wikipedia But pretty much every other so called innovation would ultimately infringe the rights of users or manipulate them.
We all sing the same song here.
We love our MP3s played on private devices.
We love our anonymity.
But we also love access to like minds and information.
Yes — nature is a great solution and we need to have it in our lives every day, but it shouldn’t be an either or situation.
For a brief and shining moment - right around 1999, we had the ability to opt in only where we wanted and to protect ourselves completely when we did not. Corporations had not figured out total surveillance.
This is the sweet spot. And Lemmy is a part of this — I consider all of the Fediverse prime time 1999.
I'm afraid you can't just take the good parts of modern technology without the bad. You either let everyone have access to modern tools and we go extinct or you limit access to a small group who will have total control over everyone else. Or simply get rid of the technology. The sweet spot wasn't 1999, it was before we had TV dumbing us down, before we had microplastics making us sick and before we had cars destroying local communities.