If you somehow still considered uploading your face/ID to Discord, here's one more reason not to: Peter Thiel seems to be the lead investor in the service that implements the age check.
-
oh ok.
I would urge readers not to have blind faith in things like Signal or Tor.
This is from 2013, over a decade ago, they've advanced since:
"The National Security Agency (“NSA”) has developed techniques to circumvent the anonymity offered by the Tor network. "
src: https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/snowden-documents-reveal-nsa-attempts-to-track-tor-users
@charlesdelavalleepoussin@mastodon.social @nina_kali_nina@tech.lgbt Yeah, Tor has issues with its design that mean it fails against global observers (which is anyone willing to pay for netflow data, so basically anyone with a large university department's budget) because it does basically nothing to mitigate timing analysis.
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @lispi314 well, it's less about this, and more about "there is no internet unless you login with your account tied to your passport" which is pretty bad
@nina_kali_nina@tech.lgbt @charlesdelavalleepoussin@mastodon.social That doesn't by itself provide all that much of a difference.
It just means that (assuming CGNAT dies) an IP = a person, so identification of endpoints is easier.
It might make determining participation in mixnets easier, but that in itself doesn't allow for deanonymizing traffic in said mixnets if it actually bothers to mitigate traffic analysis against global observers.
-
indeed, some billionaires are demanding every user on the internet is never anonymous
""the authenticity of every person that expresses themselves online""
@charlesdelavalleepoussin@mastodon.social @nina_kali_nina@tech.lgbt The idea is to stifle criticism against them or the ravages they cause.
It doesn't make for a politer society or otherwise work. China's Internet demonstrates that handily.
South Korea dropped the idea for the very same reason after trying it.
Anyone that suggests it is either ignorant and unwilling to do research, or knows exactly what harms it does and wants them.
-
@nina_kali_nina@tech.lgbt @charlesdelavalleepoussin@mastodon.social That doesn't by itself provide all that much of a difference.
It just means that (assuming CGNAT dies) an IP = a person, so identification of endpoints is easier.
It might make determining participation in mixnets easier, but that in itself doesn't allow for deanonymizing traffic in said mixnets if it actually bothers to mitigate traffic analysis against global observers.
@lispi314 @charlesdelavalleepoussin oh, but it absolutely does in regards to identity theft, online bullying, doxxing, government surveillance...
-
@lispi314 @charlesdelavalleepoussin oh, but it absolutely does in regards to identity theft, online bullying, doxxing, government surveillance...
@nina_kali_nina@tech.lgbt @charlesdelavalleepoussin@mastodon.social Oh yeah, it is very harmful to people that aren't near-exclusively using anonymized/mixnet overlays.
And that assumes that it works "as intended" rather than say... having major dataleaks and broken security in its implementation.
-
@nina_kali_nina @GerardThornley yeah like facebook, there's too many people i'm not in touch with any other way
but it's more than a little annoying
discord does its value proposition very well! it's a pity about the company
@nina_kali_nina @GerardThornley @davidgerard we should have never relied on it in the first place, and we need to remove that dependence at light speed
-
@nina_kali_nina I assume the Peter Thiel guy is part of the "Epstein class" and does mass surveillance, but I'd like some clarification on the implications here so I don't have to assume
@nina_kali_nina @ariarhythmic he is! He's directly connected to Epstein
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin well, the answer is "maybe". Some countries, including UK, already require Mastodon servers to perform age checks for the visitors in some situations. It might be that some servers will be forced (by the governments) to either implement age verification or be shut down.
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @nina_kali_nina openly resist. "Fuck you make Me" is the correct attitude
-
Does the "maybe" depend on instance size? or reach?
Thinking aloud - it can't be instance size because you can theoretically reach people beyond your instance.
I think age verification is a good thing. If it can be done in a privacy preserving way - and that, for me, is the issue.
@nina_kali_nina @charlesdelavalleepoussin there is no such thing ad privacy preserving discrimination (that's what this is)
-
@nina_kali_nina @ariarhythmic he is! He's directly connected to Epstein
@fluffykittycat@furry.engineer @nina_kali_nina@tech.lgbt @ariarhythmic@ohai.social he's also the guy who refused to say he would like the human race to continue existing when asked in an interview lol -
I'm no expert but we do check age when selling alcohol, vapes or knives in shops.
In a shop the vendor looks at the photo ID (eg student card, driving license, other) but does not keep it.
That seems to be a proportionate approach.
Sadly I don't know of anything equivalent in the digital world.
@ariarhythmic @nina_kali_nina @charlesdelavalleepoussin the people who convinced you that talking to people online is the equivalent of a pack of Marlboros are in the Epstein files
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @nina_kali_nina openly resist. "Fuck you make Me" is the correct attitude
@fluffykittycat @charlesdelavalleepoussin they do bring sites to court every now and then, but it doesn't seem to be very bad yet...
-
If you somehow still considered uploading your face/ID to Discord, here's one more reason not to: Peter Thiel seems to be the lead investor in the service that implements the age check. And, oh, the service page says they will store our data on their side (at least for a little while).
@nina_kali_nina
My preferred answer to the age verification debacle would be to reduce the risk at source, just like buying knives, cigarettes, alcohol - ban children under 16 from having access to devices capable of accessing networks.I know that this isn't workable but neither will be the age verification, children will bypass it just as they do knives etc. rather than being visible their access will go dark.
-
If you somehow still considered uploading your face/ID to Discord, here's one more reason not to: Peter Thiel seems to be the lead investor in the service that implements the age check. And, oh, the service page says they will store our data on their side (at least for a little while).
@nina_kali_nina Some 'servers' at Discord require phone number activation. I am not giving them my phone number because it will 100% end up in the next data breach. There is no need to store a phone number.
Now they like to scan my face and/or official ID? After what happened with all of those ID's that got stolen? They are not thinking straight are they?
-
@nina_kali_nina
My preferred answer to the age verification debacle would be to reduce the risk at source, just like buying knives, cigarettes, alcohol - ban children under 16 from having access to devices capable of accessing networks.I know that this isn't workable but neither will be the age verification, children will bypass it just as they do knives etc. rather than being visible their access will go dark.
@slowmart that's... a take that would make lots of vulnerable children suffer. It would help some, but it would hurt many, too. Smartphone isn't a knife.
-
I ixi@mastodon.online shared this topic
-
If you somehow still considered uploading your face/ID to Discord, here's one more reason not to: Peter Thiel seems to be the lead investor in the service that implements the age check. And, oh, the service page says they will store our data on their side (at least for a little while).
@nina_kali_nina We all need to avoid using anything associated with Thiel whose ssnity must be questioned based on some of his beliefs and comments
-
M masterhajoda@mastodon.social shared this topic
