Remember in 2012 how everyone was horrified when an authoritarian government like China forced everyone to disclose their identities to get online so they could track and censor them?
Now the authoritarians are here.
The joke of the China comparison was that we had a bunch of libertarians screaming “We can’t have social services! The government will weaponize them against us and track everything we say and do!!! Public healthcare, public transit, public education, public utilities - they’re all a slippery slope to the Police State, just like in China!”
And now we get all the same mass surveillance via privatized channels, while libertarians seem to have fully clammed up (when they aren’t quietly cheering on psychopaths like RFK Jr). But we get none of the public amenities. Yay… love my Freedom™
Anyone who frequents reddit every day is a fucking coward.
We’re gonna be sending AI generated photos to AI powered age verifiers to read AI generated articles about the latest developments in AI.
Yeah, that’s not making lists of dissenters… /s
Nah no problems here. Move along but before you do please leave a copy of your government id.
Sounds like it’s time for those subreddits to find new homes on non-UK instances of Lemmy.
All kinds of governments are rushing to implement something similar. The Fediverse solves some problems, but not the problem of a site being hosted in a single geographical location (and thus a single government’s jurisdiction). To help with this there are tools like i2p that can obscure a site’s hosting location, and there’s also work on distributed web hosting, but the latter still seems to be in its early stages. One day maybe we’ll have distributed websites that can be resilient against censorship.
That wouldn’t solve anything
Whaddaya mean? A non-UK instance doesn’t have to comply with UK law if it doesn’t operate as an entity in the UK and so it won’t require the face ID for UK visitors. So long as the instance is okay with hosting this content, it would let UK visitors view it. For example, I don’t think the UK has authority or mechanism to ask a Brazil-based instance to do this.
Then it just gets blocked in the uk and you’re back to having to use a vpn.
casually slides IP address across English Channel to France
Call your reps if you don’t want that shit in the US.
https://time.com/7288539/kids-online-safety-act-status-what-to-know/
because citizens ringing their digits to express concerns means so much more to them than their donors ringing them
Cool, are you doing anything in the real world to try to make a positive change or just shitting on people who are?
They only ever shit on anyone trying to do anything.
Oh and lots of “bOtH sIdEs!!”
Sounds like they should use this
I heard that some of the checks require video of the person performing particular movements. So a little harder to fake with AI.
There are video deepfake systems that can animate these fictional faces. We need a catalogue of the kinds of facial positions these systems ask for
One of them that is hard is waving your hand in front of your face. It trips up almost every deepfake system I’ve seen. That’s a common test we’ve had to start using with interviewees because they’d try to game the system.
I guess in that case you could do the following, though it is a bit of work:
-
Learn what actions are supposed to be taken in the demand for selfie identification
-
Record a video of yourself performing the actions, but not with your hand moving in front of your face for that section
-
Record a different video of just your hand moving past the camera
-
Deepfake the face video
-
Composite the video of the hand over top of the deep fake video with chroma/luma keying
-
Use virtual webcam software to play back the video into the actual demand for selfie identification
Wouldn’t work if a real human being is there asking, but should work for a known set of instructions ahead of time that is being audited by software.
-
interviewees? what? where are you using this?
If the kids can’t see the horrors of war [crimes], they’re more likely to be convinced of being participants.
I feel like this belongs here…
https://social-rise.com/blog/list-of-nsfw-subreddits says there are 10476 NSFW subreddits so is this the first of a 5238 long list of articles that all say “UK Users need to post selfie or photo id to view … and …”?
How do they verify the selfie is actually the user?
You send another selfie of what you actually look like, so they can compare.
It’s selfies all the way down.
They don’t, people have been using death stranding 2 photo mode to get around it
Some people, certainly. Others aren’t so tech savvy, so they’re stuck making due.
It’s crazy that we have website that are just outlets for war gore to begin with. The “solution” to the social rot that is monetization of war pornography appears to be adding a bunch of faces to a big database marked “Adult”, I guess?
Who does this even benefit, other than data warehousing and aggregation companies?
Fascists governments that want a list of who oppose something probably
I wouldn’t call it outlets for war gore. It is also about providing information that mainstream media refuses to give or intentionally distort to fit its narrative.
Oh, so this is what VPNs are used for?
Reddit blocks you plain and simple if you use a vpn, and has done so for a while. Also I don’t see how VPN relates to them gatekeeping 2 subs behind a mandatory doxxing of yourself.
Reddit blocks you plain and simple if you use a vpn
Not really true. Some VPN IPs are blocked, so you’d have to select a new VPN endpoint and try again.
Source: have done this multiple times when switching VPN endpoints.
Huh, just went and managed to get the frontpage after 5 tries with mullvad. To be fair haven’t really tried too hard to go back on Reddit the last two years, and just assumed the blocking of IPs was stricker. Still, thanks for correcting me
If you use a vpn you appear as a non-uk user, you don’t have to show the ID. If you don’t have an existing account, the only reliable source of geolocation for websites is your ip address, so a vpn can effectively circumvent that.
Oh, right. I didn’t thought of that at all, I never went beyond "well, they don’t let you use VPNs anyway. Man I need to sleep. And thanks for explaining.
Yeah, this is what happens when you write laws with vague language. Companies will always err on the side of caution.
