My information is based on this portion of a CBC Rosemary Barton interview with Kinew on how they plan on implementing the social media ban.
We’re just going to simplify things. I think will help parents too, who are probably spending a lot of heartburn and stress trying to navigate these issues with their parents [sic]. If you know, maybe mom and dad don’t have to be the bad guy, they could just point the finger at the Premier and say it’s his fault - I’m happy if that helps the average family out there.
And then just when it comes to implementation, we’ll be working over the next few months with families and teachers in the province just to make sure we get the message out. To be absolutely clear, the accountability is not to be on the parents or the family or the kid. The accountability will rest on the big tech platforms. When it comes to parents and kids, our approach will be education. But when it comes to the accountability and living up to this ask, that’s where we will be going to the big tech platforms, most of whom are American.
So what he’s saying doesn’t necessarily preclude age verification, but the principal emphasis seems to be on normalizing social media free schools and homes than prescribing a verification policy. We’ll see Saturday if it’s anything more than that. I’ll come back and say I’m wrong if such a ban comes with prescriptive age verification.
How do you have accountability on tech firms and not the parents without the dystopian age verification tools being added everywhere.
Facebook needs a way to verify.
There’s pretty much two options
Mandatory age verification in the software/os/requiring things like Persona which is a privacy nightmare. Even privacy focused zero knowledge proof systems embed it into our infrastructure which is a disaster waiting to happen and arent 100% private as governments arent willing to properly and truly make them. (yes I know ZKP systems are in EU but they weren’t designed to be 100% private with absolutely no tracking of anything. They still get some info about how the system is being used)
Put the onus on the parents to set up their computers properly so their kids cant access certain content, and put the onus on the parents to choose what their children should see on those devices. Then make social media companies respect those settings if a computer configured with them tries to connect. If a child finds a device that isnt blocked properly, oh well, to bad so sad.
There could also be preprogrammed kid-only devices, and the responsible guardian has to show their physical ID (but NO recording of data-- like buying alcohol) to prove account ownership as the guardian for the user of that device. That makes it easier for non-tech savvy guardians, while also keeping them responsible.
This person’s comment describes, I think aptly, why we need to do more than just say “ID verification is dangerous”, despite it being 100% true and necessary to say. And some good ideas on ID alternatives from the same thread here to consider: Transperancy on what data was used to determine the kind of ad you’re seeing, clearer marking of sponsorships/ad placement, legal frameworks to have tech companies change to have LLMs cite sources more accurately to reduce misinformation.
The idea of building this into our core infrastructure where we give up the ability to control it ourselves is the really fucking scary part.
In the EU for example they are using single use tokens.
If you want to go to a site that requires age verification, you maybe have 10 tokens, and you give them one.
When you run out of tokens, you have to ask the government for more.
That’s a huge risk built into our system now where the government can arbitrarily stop issuing tokens to individuals, or at large, and just lock that content off like a kill switch, and it would be at their discretion.
e.g Government: Oh, your using too many adult tokens… we won’t issue any more until next month!
Or what if something around issuing tokens is taken down in a cyber attack and everyones usage is disrupted.
It’s a governments wet dream to have this level of control built into the infrastructure, no matter what kind of safeguards they claim to have.
To me this reads like Wab is saying that the first stage of implementation is getting the message out. He doesn’t seem to be suggesting that this will be the only stage of implementation. So I predict there will still be age verification
How do you seriously put the accountability on the tech companies without age and identity verification? To me, it hasn’t been thought out and I fear a typical poorly executed government plan. One with long reaching implications.
I thought the NDP was just going to implement a run of the mill social media ban. Am I missing something?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBvFWXQX-lA&t=540
My information is based on this portion of a CBC Rosemary Barton interview with Kinew on how they plan on implementing the social media ban.
So what he’s saying doesn’t necessarily preclude age verification, but the principal emphasis seems to be on normalizing social media free schools and homes than prescribing a verification policy. We’ll see Saturday if it’s anything more than that. I’ll come back and say I’m wrong if such a ban comes with prescriptive age verification.
How do you have accountability on tech firms and not the parents without the dystopian age verification tools being added everywhere.
Facebook needs a way to verify.
There’s pretty much two options
Mandatory age verification in the software/os/requiring things like Persona which is a privacy nightmare. Even privacy focused zero knowledge proof systems embed it into our infrastructure which is a disaster waiting to happen and arent 100% private as governments arent willing to properly and truly make them. (yes I know ZKP systems are in EU but they weren’t designed to be 100% private with absolutely no tracking of anything. They still get some info about how the system is being used)
Put the onus on the parents to set up their computers properly so their kids cant access certain content, and put the onus on the parents to choose what their children should see on those devices. Then make social media companies respect those settings if a computer configured with them tries to connect. If a child finds a device that isnt blocked properly, oh well, to bad so sad.
There could also be preprogrammed kid-only devices, and the responsible guardian has to show their physical ID (but NO recording of data-- like buying alcohol) to prove account ownership as the guardian for the user of that device. That makes it easier for non-tech savvy guardians, while also keeping them responsible.
This person’s comment describes, I think aptly, why we need to do more than just say “ID verification is dangerous”, despite it being 100% true and necessary to say. And some good ideas on ID alternatives from the same thread here to consider: Transperancy on what data was used to determine the kind of ad you’re seeing, clearer marking of sponsorships/ad placement, legal frameworks to have tech companies change to have LLMs cite sources more accurately to reduce misinformation.
Ya, that’s probably a good idea.
The idea of building this into our core infrastructure where we give up the ability to control it ourselves is the really fucking scary part.
In the EU for example they are using single use tokens.
If you want to go to a site that requires age verification, you maybe have 10 tokens, and you give them one.
When you run out of tokens, you have to ask the government for more.
That’s a huge risk built into our system now where the government can arbitrarily stop issuing tokens to individuals, or at large, and just lock that content off like a kill switch, and it would be at their discretion.
e.g Government: Oh, your using too many adult tokens… we won’t issue any more until next month!
Or what if something around issuing tokens is taken down in a cyber attack and everyones usage is disrupted.
It’s a governments wet dream to have this level of control built into the infrastructure, no matter what kind of safeguards they claim to have.
To me this reads like Wab is saying that the first stage of implementation is getting the message out. He doesn’t seem to be suggesting that this will be the only stage of implementation. So I predict there will still be age verification
How do you seriously put the accountability on the tech companies without age and identity verification? To me, it hasn’t been thought out and I fear a typical poorly executed government plan. One with long reaching implications.
Prosecute bad practices and dark patterns instead of prescribing mandatory age verification.
They want to make the tech companies accountable to enforce it. How would that work?
I don’t think the details are out yet