Comment by torified | Hacker News Reader

Comment by torified | Hacker News Reader

As a child I had unlimited time to work out how to access stuff that interested me, a lot of which was forbidden in some way, because that's the most interesting stuff!

In the process I learned about computers and eventually got a modem to access BBSes. It was exhilarating! I would have spent any amount of effort and time to access it.

I basically attribute my entire career to accessing stuff the puritans would have tried to prevent me from accessing.

Also, almost all of the porn I have came from private trackers.

I very much doubt they will be concerned with any of these rules. Things will just move more underground if that happens. And the more underground you go, the more unsavory stuff you might find.

But we all know this isn't actually about protecting children.

In a way, I hope that it ends up being a good thing because the whole clearnet should probably be nuked from orbit.

Us nerds can come up with something better. Federated, encrypted, anonymous and unblockable. It's just the spam problem that is the hard thing to solve. Maybe reputation with proof of work could work.

I'll happily leave the normies to their milquetoast, corporate, manipulated existence.

> Us nerds can come up with something better. Federated, encrypted, anonymous and unblockable.

And eventually illegal. That's what we see already.

And if it's not technically illegal then Google, Apple and OpenAI will censor it. Again, we see that already. On YouTube you cannot even talk about important topics such as suicide.

It's also coordinated. As much as I dislike Infowars, the fact that private institutions killed it at the same time is just scary.

Just like it's scary that we now have ethics taught by private entities. Be it what you can search or what ChatGPT or Gemini think.

It feels like a lot of these are strongly locked in place, which if you look at history is extremely bad. Only now private institutions have more power and control than any king ever had.

And all of that is if you don't consider the pockets full of money.

"isn't actually".

It's dual use. It is about protecting children, but also along the way these other properties happen to come along. Thing is, with enough cryptography, we could get a way that this would work, but it's too complicated, which results in you being right after all.

> with enough cryptography we could get a way this would work

No amount of cryptography will stop a parent from handing a verified device to a child. Parental controls (however effective you think they might be) have come enabled by default in the UK for the last decade and literally need to be turned off - which is exactly what will continue to happen.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com