#identity verification issues

[news-buzz]

Pensioner, 89, owes £4,900 in tax but HMRC won't let her pay | UK | News News Buzz

Pensioner Jan Cannons has attempted to pay her HMRC tax bill but because she does not have a driving licence or a passport she has been unable to do so. Her frustrations have turned to panic as she is worried she will be left with massive penalties from the taxman due to the incomplete self-assessment. HMRC previously operated a system called Gov.uk Verify which allowed people to confirm their…

[maclanahan--mermaid-comics]

Hey Americans, I know there is a LOT happening, but please contact your house rep on KOSA. This will make it illegal for me to post my art online in order to "protect kids" cause those who sponsor it want to use it try to suppress LGBT content.

On a more cyber security side, I also don't trust website's having to use government issued IDs for age verification cause the chance for Identity theft will skyrocket through the roof. Since I keep my online stuff VERY separated, I will not use any website that requires ID.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

ANNA BONESTEEL AND EVAN GREER at Them:

Pride Month is over. As the “LOVE IS LOVE” banners come down and companies lose the rainbow gradients from their logos, we’re faced with a painful truth: LGBTQ+ people, especially the most marginalized among us, are in the crosshairs of a queerphobic backlash that is targeting our health, our histories, and especially our youth. And things are getting worse, not better. According to NPR, half of all US states now ban gender-affirming care for people under 18. Eight states now censor LGBTQ+ issues from school curricula via “Don’t Say Gay” laws, and two more states are considering similar legislation this year. The number-one book targeted for censorship is a graphic novel memoir about gender identity.

This June, Democratic lawmakers marched in Pride parades and spoke on stages, vowing to protect our community and fight back against legislative attacks on queer youth. But some of these same lawmakers are actively pushing federal legislation that would cut LGBTQ+ youth off from resources, information, and communities that can save their lives. Currently, 38 Democratic senators support the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), a bill that is vocally opposed by many queer and trans youth, along with a coalition of human rights and LGBTQ+ groups. As a queer- and trans-led advocacy group focused on the ways technology impacts human rights, our organization, Fight for the Future, has seen bills like KOSA before: misguided internet bills that try to solve real problems, but ultimately throw marginalized people under the bus by expanding censorship and surveillance rather than addressing corporate abuses. KOSA’s most obvious predecessor is SESTA/FOSTA, a Trump-era bill that its supporters claimed would clamp down on online sex trafficking. Instead, the bill did almost nothing to accomplish its goal, and has actively harmed LGBTQ+ people and sex workers whose harm-reduction resources were decimated by the subsequent crackdown on online speech.

Like SESTA/FOSTA, some of KOSA’s supporters have positive intent. Many lawmakers and organizations support KOSA because they are concerned about real harms caused by Big Tech, like addictive design features and manipulative algorithms. But, also like SESTA/FOSTA, KOSA doesn’t touch the core issues with Big Tech’s extractive, exploitative business model. Instead, KOSA relies on a “duty of care” model that will pressure social platforms to suppress any speech the government is willing to argue makes kids “depressed” or “anxious.”

Under KOSA, platforms could be sued for recommending a potentially depression- or anxiety-inducing video to anyone under 18. We know from past experience that in order to protect their bottom line, social media companies will overcompensate and actively suppress posts and groups about gender identity, sexuality, abortion — anything they’re worried the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) could be willing to argue “harms” kids. How do you think a potential Trump administration’s FTC would use that kind of authority?

Other features of the bill stretch its censorship potential further. Despite language claiming that the bill does not require platforms to conduct “age verification,” to meaningfully comply with the law, platforms will have to know who is under 18. This means they’ll institute invasive age verification systems or age-gating, which can completely cut off access for LGBTQ+ youth who have unsupportive parents, and/or make it unsafe for queer people to access online resources anonymously. KOSA creates powerful new ways for the government to interfere with online speech. For this reason, the bill is like catnip to extreme right-wing groups like the Heritage Foundation, the coordinators of Project 2025, who have explicitly said they want to use it to target LGBTQ+ content. KOSA’s lead Republican sponsor, Marsha Blackburn, has also said in an interview she wants to use KOSA to protect minors “from the transgender.”

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) purports to protect children, but in reality, it’s a censorship bill that would impact LGBTQ+ youth. #StopKOSA #KOSA

[nanowrimo]

A Message from the NaNoWriMo Board of Directors

Dear NaNoWriMo Community Members,

Thank you for reaching out to us with your inquiries about the forums, your support, offers to volunteer, and your legitimate concerns.

Our inbox has been flooded, and we appreciate all of the thoughtful responses from participants and volunteers who genuinely care about NaNoWriMo, our fellow writers, and the community as we do. It is impossible to respond to each message individually, but we wanted to let you all know we are working with purpose and sincerity.

Please see below the breakdown of the work that has been done since we last shared an update with the community. Our intention is to keep you abreast of all we are doing to make NaNoWriMo a better, safer, place:

We’ve overseen a full-scale review of business practices led by former Board Member, Kilby Blades, who has stepped in to assist the organization on an interim basis.  

We’ve begun to implement new procedures around community safety, including:

Full revision and legal review of our employee handbook and codes of conduct.

Full revision and legal review of our Municipal Liaison(ML) agreement.

Development of a formal contract agreement for all (non-ML) Volunteers.

Development of a stricter vetting process for all volunteers (which includes identity verification and background checks, wherever necessary).

Licensing of a digital constituent management system that will enhance volunteer management capabilities.

Comprehensive background checks for all current employees.

Checks and balances to ensure that standards of conduct and ethics are adhered to (e.g., better leadership training, volunteer training, tech mechanisms, and active oversight).

We’ve made staffing changes and revised our staffing plan.

We have rescoped certain roles and initiated some staffing changes. (However, certain employees who left the organization voluntarily are in pursuit of their next opportunities.)

We believe that learning from this moment through addressing skill gaps in the organization is healthy and we will go through a hiring process to fill necessary gaps in open roles.

We’ve listened to other community feedback and are still in listening mode.

We’ve disabled the mechanism on the YWP website that allows users to self-identify as educators for the purpose of creating classrooms, and we are researching mechanisms that will allow us to verify adults as educators.

We’ve revised our technology roadmap to address usability issues and are hoping to introduce new features in 2024.

We are midway through a deep dive on forums and forum moderation; this has included benchmarking with other organizations with similar challenges.

In February, we will hold focus groups for continuing MLs. We are also thinking through the logistics of Town Hall meetings and other gatherings.

We’ve processed dozens of pages of community member feedback and are integrating it into our thinking.

With the staffing changes mentioned above, we are open to hearing from those of you who have reached out with offers to help and/or be a part of the organization’s future. Get notified about future job opportunities at NaNoWriMo.

We are excited about the future, and expect it to be brighter! We hope you feel seen and heard, and that you will stick with us as we continue supporting the writing community and our organization.

Kind regards,

NaNoWriMo Board of Directors

[frownyalfred]

damn everyone out here today to cause pain and angst eh?

How would all the bat kids react you think? Like here are these people who are their grandparents but only by virtue of being their Dads parents they've only ever heard of them through memories shared, and the portraits in the house etc but they're more familiar with their memorials than the people themselves; the Martha Wayne charity foundation; the Thomas Wayne wing(s) in the hospital; and the biggest one of all, the reason for Batman existing and thus what has shaped a big portion of their lives. Sure with some of the kids they may have done some form of vigilantism themselves in a world without Batman, but not at the same level and not to the extent that their lives have been shaped by it.

And now these people are real and tangible and not just a memory and idea anymore, and they're technically supposed to be grandma and grandad but they're younger than Dad. Their dad who they can see is pulling himself in tight, restricting and restraining and holding himself back from who he actually is. And no matter how happy Bruce is that they're alive the kids can see how it hurts him. And like it was talked about before w the Clark/Lois stuff would the kids close ranks? Bc despite any interpersonal issues or current fighting the batfamily is fiercely protective of their own, and Martha & Thomas are family, but at the same time they're not truly Family yet (?)

The very first thing I thought of actually was okay they get all the initial shock and reunions and identity verification over with and it's been a very long and taxing experience so everyone is heading to bed and they'll figure out what happen next in the morning. Except. Bruce probably sleeps in the master bedroom, why wouldn't he at this point? And the manor has more than enough rooms for everyone but how do you even go about that discussion? It's Martha and Thomas's room but also it hasn't been for decades. Do you have your newly resurrected parents sleep in their familiar and yet completely unfamiliar room the first night back? If they say a guest room is fine should you as their son insist that they have their room that's been yours for decades now back? Does this cross anyone's minds before they all decide to head to bed and Bruce and T&M all go to the same room?

OOOOOF. Okay yeah, kind of in line with the cheating fic — I kind of want to write a fic now where Martha and Thomas come back and it ISN’T all sunshine and tearful reunions. It’s awkward and defensive and ultimately unsustainable.

Because where do you go from there? With Bruce holding himself back, the batkids closing ranks, and Alfred awkwardly trying to mediate Martha and Thomas who are becoming increasingly suspicious and confused? Maybe they don’t agree with this new Gotham. Maybe they’re even disappointed, something that would probably cripple Bruce even just temporarily.

[botgal]

Just a reminder. This coming Tuesday 7/2/24 is when the big internet bills for California will be seen by their respective Committees for markup.

SB 976 will be looked over by the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committees, and AB 3080 and AB 1949 will be looked over by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The time to send position letters has passed, but there's still time to call and email your assembly reps and state senators who are members of each committee to give them your opposition towards these bills and why. So make these last couple days count. Check to see if your reps are members of these committees, and tell them why you're opposed to them passing. (Most especially for these you can bring up the issue of the recent data breach of Twitter/X's age verification method just this past week to show why anything to do with age or ID verifidation is a bad idea.)

Thank you for your efforts everyone! May we show them exactly why we're in opposition and for good reason!

Find your CA state Assembly and Senate representatives

https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/

CA Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee Members

CA Senate Judiciary Committee Members

[nats-revival]

Not they tryna reenact KOSA… anyway yall, here’s why KOSA is bad!!

If you don’t already know, KOSA, or Kids Online Safety Act is a bill that was proposed to keep children safe on the internet. You might ask ‘why is this bill bad if it’s in favor of supporting the safety of children online’? Well, according to stopkosa.com, it puts pressure on platforms to add even MORE filters on anything they think is inappropriate for children. This is especially harmful for LBGTQIA+ youth because the knowledge about this topic would be censored, as well as knowledge on suicide prevention and LGBTQIA+ support groups. Do you see how this an issue? For those children who are wanting to learn more about these topics they’d be turned away because of this bill. It would also be likely that it’ll allow the shutdown of websites that allow them to learn about race, sexuality and gender.

This bill would also add more internet surveillance for all users across all social media platforms. It would expand the use of age verification and parental monitoring controls. These things in itself are already very invasive, but doesn’t take into consideration the children who live in unsafe environments where they are domestically abused and/or are trying to escape these situations. To add my two cents onto this, I strongly believe that the KOSA bill is an unnecessary violation of our first amendment rights (if you’re American), and doesn’t really make the internet any more safer. It actually makes it more unusable for youth. Hypothetically, if this bill were to be passed, then this would make social media unusable for literally anybody. To censor content from the youth about wanting to learn about their identity is extremely harmful. Blocking them from accessing resources that may prove as helpful in their scenarios is outlandish and unneeded. We try to shelter our youth so much to the point where we try to boil them down to only being with their parents want them to be and also not being able to let them learn and explore about other things that they may want to identify themselves with. This is very harmful.

This is a list of companies who are saying no to KOSA ..

• Access Now

• ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)

• Black and Pink National

• Center for Democracy & Technology

• COLAGE

• Defending Rights & Dissent

• Don’t Delete Art

• EducateUS: SIECUS In Action

• Electronic Frontier Foundation

• Equality Arizona

• Equality California

• Equality Michigan

• Equality New Mexico

• Equality Texas

• Fair Wisconsin

• Fairness Campaign

• Fight for the Future

• Free Speech Coalition

• Freedom Network USA

• Indivisible Eastside

• Indivisible Plus Washington

• Internet Society

• Kairos

• Lexington Pride Center

• LGBT Technology Partnership

• Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition

• Media Justice

• National Coalition Against Censorship

• Open Technology Institute

• OutNebraska

• PDX Privacy

• Presente.org

• Reframe Health and Justice

• Restore The Fourth

• SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change

• SWOP Behind Bars 

• TAKE

• TechFreedom

• The 6:52 Project Foundation, Inc.

• The Sex Workers Project of the Urban Justice Center

• Transgender Education Network of Texas

• TransOhio

• University of Michigan Dearborn – Muslim Student Association 

• URGE

• WA People’s Privacy

• Woodhull Freedom Foundation

There is something you can do to stop the KOSA bill from being passed! On the website I linked, there is a petition. All you have to do is fill out the information and it’ll send off an email for you. The email reads as follows:

I’m writing to urge you to reject the Kids Online Safety Act, a misguided bill that would put vulnerable young people at risk. KOSA would fail to address the root issues related to kid’s safety online. Instead, it would endanger some of the most vulnerable people in our society while undermining human rights and children’s privacy. The bill would result in widespread internet censorship by pressuring platforms to use incredibly broad “content filters” and giving state Attorneys General the power to decide what content kids should and shouldn’t have access to online. This power could be abused in a number of ways and be politicized to censor information and resources. KOSA would also likely lead to the greater surveillance of children online by requiring platforms to gather data to verify user identity. There is a way to protect kids and all people online from egregious data abuse and harmful content targeting: passing a strong Federal data privacy law that prevents tech companies from collecting so much sensitive data about all of us in the first place, and gives individuals the ability to sue companies that misuse their data. KOSA, although well-meaning, must not move forward. Please protect privacy and stop the spread of censorship online by opposing KOSA.

The website also gives you like a format of what you can say if you chose to call your representatives. If after reading this post, you feel inclined to do something then I would say just go ahead and do it. My first time learning about KOSA was today immediately after seeing the post I felt inclined to send my lawmakers an email. Please try to help when you can and this will only take a few minutes so I think this is something that you can consider. This post is getting a little long now, so I’ll stop here. There are more resources online if you would like to learn more about the cons of this KOSA bill, thank you for reading.

[rideboomindia]

What strategies can RideBoom implement to ensure the safety and security of its platform?

RideBoom has implemented several strategies to ensure the safety and security of its platform:

Rigorous Driver Screening: RideBoom conducts thorough background checks and driving history verifications on all its drivers to ensure they meet strict safety standards. This includes screening for criminal records and driving violations. The company has deactivated over 40,000 drivers who did not meet their safety criteria [2].

Continuous Driver Monitoring: RideBoom monitors its drivers' records and behaviors to identify potential safety concerns. This allows the company to quickly address any issues and maintain the integrity of its driver pool [2].

In-App Safety Features: RideBoom's mobile app includes various safety features, such as sharing trip details with friends or family, an emergency button to contact emergency services, and prompts to verify the driver's identity and license plate number [1][2].

Integration with Emergency Services: RideBoom has integrated its platform with RapidSOS, a technology that provides emergency dispatchers with critical information like the rider's location and vehicle details, enabling a faster and more effective emergency response [2].

Transparent Pricing and Policies: RideBoom's pricing model is transparent, with upfront fare estimates and no hidden costs, allowing customers to make informed decisions about their rides. The company also clearly communicates its safety policies and procedures to both drivers and passengers [1].

24/7 Customer Support: RideBoom offers round-the-clock customer support to address any inquiries, concerns, or feedback promptly, ensuring a smooth and satisfactory experience for all customers [1].

Expansion of Electric Vehicle Fleet: By incorporating electric vehicles into its offerings, RideBoom is promoting sustainable and environmentally-friendly transportation options, which can contribute to overall safety and security [3].

Multi-Modal Transportation Integration: RideBoom's integration of various transportation modes, such as ride-sharing and public transit, provides customers with more flexibility and options, enhancing the overall safety and convenience of their journeys [3].

[thoughtportal]

An age verification bill in Kansas that is the most extreme in the country has passed both House and Senate and is on its way to the governor’s desk. The bill will make sites with more than 25 percent adult content liable to heavy fines if they don’t verify that visitors are over the age of 18. It also calls being gay “sexual conduct,” which critics say could set up the state for more censorship of LGBT+ citizens.

The bill is similar to the many others introduced or passed across the country in the last year, including ones enacted in Texas, Montana, North Carolina, Virginia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Utah. Age verification laws in Indiana and Idaho will take effect on July 1, and bills are progressing in several more states.

The Kansas legislation has a major difference: The state will lower the bar for how much adult content a website needs to host in order to be liable. In the other states where age verification laws have been enacted, it’s been 33 percent, or one-third. Kansas reduces that number to 25 percent. Mainstream sites and social media platforms like Reddit and Twitter, as well as many other websites across the internet, host a large amount of porn despite not being “porn sites.” With an even lower bar to liability, the chilling effect of sexual content, sex education, and anything outside of heterosexual, biblical sterility could be massive.Age Verification Laws Drag Us Back to the Dark Ages of the InternetInvasive and ineffective age verification laws that require users show government-issued ID, like a driver’s license or passport, are passing like wildfire across the U.S.Emanuel Maiberg

“Any commercial entity that knowingly shares or distributes material that is harmful to minors on a website and such material appears on 25% or more of the webpages viewed on such website in any calendar month” falls under the purview of this bill, according to its text. If sites don’t comply, they could be fined up to $10,000 for each violation, and parents could sue for damages of at least $50,000.

Kansas criminal law defines “material harmful to minors” as involving “nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or sadomasochistic abuse.” 

“Sexual conduct,” under Kansas law, means “acts of masturbation, homosexuality, sexual intercourse or physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals or pubic area or buttocks or with a human female's breast.” The Associated Press reported that the bill’s critics, including Democratic Rep. Brandon Woodard, “argued that the law could be interpreted broadly enough that LGBTQ+ teenagers could not access information about sexual orientation or gender identity because the legal definition of sexual conduct includes acts of ‘homosexuality.’” 

Aylo, Pornhub’s parent company, has blocked access to its more than a dozen websites in seven of the eight states with age verification laws in place. Earlier this month, 404 Media first reported that it blocked Texas. Age verification laws that require sites to verify ages—done through government-issued IDs like driver’s licenses or passports—won’t stop minors from seeing porn. Instead, as Emanuel and I wrote earlier this week, they’ll just drive everyone to sites with non-consensual abuse imagery and stolen content while opening everyone up to privacy exploitation. 

[xxstarlight-lifexx]

Some quotes I have from people speaking out against KOSA, please reblog, tag people, cross-post on other platforms, and share with everyone you can, all quotes are fair use <3

“This law is a scam, created with the express purpose of persecuting LGBTQ+ people and silencing victims of abuse. That is the only possible outcome of these kinds of bills.

Oppose them on principle. Be skeptical whenever they are even brought-up.

This isn’t about safety—it is a takeover of THE major avenue to disseminate information in the modern world. It is more than censorship, it defines the avenues that thought may even take.

It will lead to identity verification companies like Clear or ID.me getting more of people’s private data and guaranteed, exclusive government contracts for surveillance and data collection, in violation of the spirit of the 4th Amendment, if not the letter.

It is also an absolute certainty that conservatives in positions of authority will use this program to persecute LGBTQ+ people, with the force of the State, under the guise of protecting children from pornography and "grooming". It has been an explicit misdirection tactic the right has invented to poison debate on trans rights issues and the (unconnected) growing evidence of sexual impropriety among the powerful, particularly conservatives.

Furthermore, I and most others will not abide by this law, if it is passed, and will take whatever actions necessary to safeguard our personal information via VPN, encryption, onion networking, etc., regardless of their permissibility.”

“This is a violation of basic rights on the Internet. Whatever happened to Freedom of Speech? Or are we just gonna ignore a literal Amendment in favor of “protecting the American children" while many of those children are the ones against this??”

“having full privacy on the internet may have saved my life growing up. don’t take away kid’s privacy, there’s already perfectly reasonable ways for parents to monitor kids.”

“I think that people have a right to privacy online, especially children. This doesn't seem like a bill that would actually protect children from anything, it would just make important resources more difficult to access, increase censorship online, and increase surveillance, all of which I oppose.”

“There are three things you never give out on the internet for your safety. 1) Name, 2) Face, and 3) Home. This bill guarantees that all three will be easily available to those who wish to hurt the children this bill falsely claims to protect. If you actually care about children, stop this bill. Listen to what those of us that actually use the internet are telling you. Children and adults deserve a private, anonymous space to be.”

“i'm a queer teen and i know full well the importance online spaces have in supporting lgbtq+ youth, especially ones who don't have supportive environments in person. censorship doesn't actually erase the information, it just makes it harder to access.”

“I’m writing to urge you to reject the Kids Online Safety Act, a misguided bill that would put vulnerable young people at risk.

KOSA would fail to address the root issues related to kid’s safety online. Instead, it would endanger some of the most vulnerable people in our society while undermining human rights and children’s privacy. The bill would result in widespread internet censorship by pressuring platforms to use incredibly broad “content filters” and giving state Attorneys General the power to decide what content kids should and shouldn’t have access to online. This power could be abused in a number of ways and be politicized to censor information and resources.

KOSA would also likely lead to the greater surveillance of children online by requiring platforms to gather data to verify user identity.

There is a way to protect kids and all people online from egregious data abuse and harmful content targeting: passing a strong Federal data privacy law that prevents tech companies from collecting so much sensitive data about all of us in the first place, and gives individuals the ability to sue companies that misuse their data.

KOSA, although well-meaning, must not move forward. Please protect privacy and stop the spread of censorship online by opposing KOSA.”

“Censorship doesn't keep kids safe. Censorship does not save abused children. Censorship does not save queer children. Censorship will not save any of us. Freedom for us all. Freedom for the internet. This shit cannot stand.”

“This bill is a massive overreach on civil liberties and freedom of speech in particular. It should not be within the government's purview to determine what content is acceptable, no matter which party is in power.”

“As we all know, the major threats to American children today are books, bathrooms, and the Internet.

Not getting shot in their own schools or attacked on their own streets.

Since graduating from the public school system in 2007, I haven't seen anything from elected officials to contradict this.”

“KOSA is a censorship bill in sheep’s clothing. It would erode Americans’ rights to privacy, especially that of vulnerable and marginalized Americans, and gather information about the whereabouts and identities of the children it play-acts at “protecting”.”

“This is a ridiculous law

KOSA is a giant bill that is pretending to be about child safety, but is actually overreaching government censorship. It is a violation of free speech and the 1st amendment.

This bill would require that internet users upload their government ID to access any site, and state attorney generals could sue to remove any site that contains content deemed "harmful" to children. The government will be able to censor ANYTHING - such as abortion info, LGBTQ+ resources, and any content relating to protesting or organizing. They will also be able to ID you if you search for any of these topics. This is the opposite of a free internet!”

“The law is pretty much just a trojan horse for censorship.”

“frankly i dont want to be put on a list the gov has of every queer person who opposes their anti-lgbt laws”

“I care about actually helping people instead of making a bill that is going to kill any ability for anyone to get help. That is going to be used to police anyone who disagrees with the absolute mess everything is right now. The conservative morals don’t allow for anyone not white, cuz, straight, or male; and I won’t have that enforced on the fucking public forum.”

[aressida]

What is the Digital Identity Bill?

It's the glue that holds together the digital control agenda by which every Australian will be controlled, corralled, exploited and then gagged when they speak or act in opposition.

The government knows Digital ID will be compulsory by the device of preventing access to government services, banking services, air travel and major purchases for any Australian who does not have a Digital ID.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Digital ID cannot be stopped But can we cut off its balls?

In my opinion there is not much chance of stopping digital id entirely with the current ownership of the opposition party, Libs-Nats, and with so many Labor Greens and Teals in parliament.

Our best hope is to win some concessions… by politely demanding (by phone, or in person) each of our local MPs propose or support another member proposing the following amendments or they will lose your vote and a dozen of your friends and family’s votes at the next election.

Required Amendments:

(1) ensure there are strong and broad protections against any person, entity, business, government, etc making digital ID compulsory for any purpose whatsoever (be that to gain or maintain employment, be it to access a space or place, be it to purchase (or even to receive for free) any goods or services, to receive or access any payments or services from the government, etc).

(2) ensure the protections are sufficiently broad to protect from “nudging”. For example special queues for people with/without digital ID (where one group is treated with a different level of service), for example cutting back on staffing for face to face traditional ID verification processes, or any other practice which could be seen by a reasonable person to make non digital ID options less convenient.

(3) amend the Bill to ensure that no one should be able to veto the protections outlined in (1) and (2) for any reason whatsoever, not even the relevant minister.

(4) also update consumer rights laws and privacy laws to enhance and complement the above protections (especially against it becoming mandatory or mandatory adjacent or as mandatory as possible).

Read on to understand why asking your MP to simply vote against it will probably be worse….

It is not good enough to ask Lib Nats to vote against Digital ID outright. There’s not enough of them by themselves.

We also know the Greens and Teals are willing to vote FOR it in its current form. We saw that in the Senate.

Labor plus Greens in the lower house is more than enough to push it through.

Therefore we have to (a) scare the pants off labor/greens/teals backbenchers, especially any of them who only won on slim margins or saw huge swings against them last election. Make it clear they need to do what we the people in their electorates want or they are risking their future in politics.

However, Labor MPs almost never ‘cross the floor’ and vote against their party. They risk expulsion from their party, and then they will probably lose their seat at the next election. Again, they’re scared of losing their job as MP.

So option 1 (tell them to vote against Digital ID) is a non-starter. Labor MPs will not do that unless their whole party decides not to - which is highly unlikely. We will simply end up with Digital ID legislation in its current form with minimal protections from it becoming mandatory.

So we need to convince the Labor MPs to take the amendments issue to the Party room meetings to get the suggested amendments through. I.e. we need to scare them enough." - JS Digital ID. Telegram.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[rhyzvee]

September is the month of mental pain. I understand why it is suicide prevention month (at least here in Japan), but at the same time, I wish I didn't recognise it.

I have been questioning my identity since around the time Covid struck. And I came out as trans last April - online only, NOT exposed in real life. Why? ..Best not to ask right now.

All this time, I feel like I am alone in this situation... Everything I’m going through… It’s far too complicated for anyone to understand. Multiple issues cross over, creating one large issue, and there are several of those…

I wish I could move to another country.

Keep in mind that Japan, like the majority of Asia, do not recognise and support neutral genders or “third option.” They act as if those does not exist in the world. Most if not all physically transitioned people via surgery do not get verification of transitioning, meaning that their “gender” (sex) does not change. Heck, HRT medications do not exist. And if those do exist, there would likely be a court battle (a formal request) before starting them. Much worse than UK’s 5-year waiting queue.

If you wish to move to Japan… You must make a sacrifice. You can’t be queer in this place. You won’t get rights.

Gender roles are a crucial part of Japanese society, and I wish that could change.

My personality and tendencies are NOT that of typical men’s. If I don’t talk much even when given the chance, I often walk with my hands waving sideways (only the right hand), or put one of my hand on my chest. I tend to lengthen my hair, and people around stops me from it. I wear oversized clothings with natural-looking colours now that I can choose on my own. I check my body, especially the tops, wishing I had different body shapes.

Every day, it’s just.. fighting mentally to live. I can’t ask people around me for help… I only ask to those who I trust.. online. None of them are in Asia. Could had been better if we were close.. and hug them. It’s only painful to be here.

I am falling through a depression loophole. No bottom to land on. Is there no hope for me..?

[apocalymons]

Are you digikin? Are you looking for a place to hang out with other digikin to chat about kinstuff? Then consider joining The Net Ocean, a brand-new digikin Discord server!

Features:

PluralKit, for anyone who needs it, and a channel specifically for headmate introduction threads!

Appy for verification--- no need to worry about randos coming in to the server!

React roles to help show other people what canons you connect to, including roles for more obscure sources like the Xros Wars Manga, Appmon, and original media!

Rules:

Please be respectful of fellow members of the server. This server is intended to be a comfortable space for all kinds of digikin. Respect everyone's pronouns and identities. Failure to do so will result in administrative action depending on the severity of the issue. There is no tolerance for things such as racism, ableism, homophobia, or transphobia here.

This server is only for adults (18+). This is for ease of moderation. If you are found to be lying about your age and are a minor, you will be banned from the server, no exceptions. That said, don't be needlessly crude. If the need for NSFW chats arises, keep riskier topics to it. No one wants to be jump scared by messages that could get them fired.

We are an explicitly plural inclusive server. That means that, to join, you must be accepting of different system structures, be they traumagenic, endogenic, or anything between or without. We do not consider "endo-neutral" to be an inclusive stance, as this often implies an expectation for endogenic systems to "prove" their existence.

This server is run by a system that would generally be considered an "anti." If this bothers you, we would not recommend this server for you. This warning is provided for your comfort as much as ours, as we understand that those labels or the perception of them can come across as antagonistic.

Piggybacking off of that, while in this server please refrain from engaging in discourse subjects. The hard rules set above exist for a reason, but we are all complex individuals, and discourse can often devolve quickly into fights. We understand that the presence of Rule 4 to begin with is, in itself, discourse, but further discussion in the server of these topics (such as shipping discourse) is discouraged.

Similarly, let's try to leave heavier topics at the door. For the time being, outside of memory vent channels, we will not be opening vent channels in this server. Right now the world is a mess, but let's not make this a space to talk about it.

Try to stay relatively on-topic to a given channel. If you find yourself drifting from the subject of one channel to conversation that would be better suited in another, consider moving to continue talking. If you find yourself unable to determine what is "on topic" for a channel, refer to its description or ask a moderator in the suggestions chat for clarification. A moderator may redirect particularly off-topic conversation, just so that anyone that might want to talk on-topic is able to do so.

It should go without saying, but please be courteous to the privacy of your peers. Do not screenshot messages or profiles of other server members without permission. Similarly, we request that you do not share another member's art or writing without explicit permission.

Any art shared in the chat which you did not make must be credited. Anyone found claiming someone else's artwork (either via uncredited artwork or use of content-generation LLMs, colloquially known as "AI" generators) will be given a warning or banned, depending on the severity of the infraction.

If we ever have to add rules, we'll make an announcement to let everyone know what's changed.

If you are using PluralKit, please ensure you have a System Tag enabled and appended to your root account's username. This is for ease of moderation. Warnings are applied on an account basis; therefore, if one headmate in a system breaks a rule, the system as a whole will receive disciplinary action.

Well? What are you waiting for?

Let's dive!

[cowboymaterials]

Tumblr v. NYC Commission on Human Rights FOIA dropped

Freedom of Information request to get Tumblr's case files Re: human rights lawsuit has finally come through!

Notable records disclosed include:

Dates and anticipated dates of court mandated training and appeal process overhaul completion (which seems to not reflect actual completion dates);

Head of Trust and Safety's verification of attendance at training;

Redacted lists of employees who attended training.

One interesting thing from this is that we can see who provided the "Unconscious Bias" training. The court mandated Tumblr staff needed to take Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) training.

Makes sense! But it's funny to see that the people providing training are Tumblr's corporate lawyers, all cisgender white women, whose area of practice is Intellectual Property.

I have no faith in training anyways, but hiring corporate lawyers demonstrates that Tumblr views this issue as a matter of avoiding liability rather than confronting systemic discrimination.

Fun fact: Brooke Oliver was the "legal architect" of Burning Man and she also helped trademark the phrase "Dykes on Bikes." So maybe IP law is kinda girlboss?

Anyways, here is the link to read the full file:

[taviamoth]

🚨🟢 Martyr Izz El-Din Al-Qassam Brigades spokesman, Abu Obeida:

—

We previously announced that we had lost contact with our fighters who were guarding a number of the enemy's prisoners in our sincere Strip, and we assumed that a number of prisoners had been killed as a result of the zionist bombing.

After examination and verification during the recent weeks, we have confirmed the martyrdom of a number of our fighters and the killing of 7 of the enemy's prisoners in the Strip as a result of the zionist bombing, including:

1- Chaim Gershon Peri (חיים פרי)

2- Yoram Itak Metzger (יורם מצגר)

3- Amiram Israel Cooper (עמירם קופר)

We will announce the names of the other four dead after confirming their identities.

We confirm that the number of the enemy's prisoners killed as a result of military operations by the enemy's army in the Gaza Strip may exceed 70 prisoners. We have always been keen to preserve the lives of the prisoners, but it has become clear that the enemy's leadership deliberately kills its prisoners to rid itself of this issue.

At the same time, we affirm that the price we will take for five living prisoners or ten is the same price we would have taken for all prisoners had they not been killed by the enemy's bombing operations.

[botgal]

California Bills To Watch For

I'm sure by now that many people are aware of the dangers posed by AB 3080 (discussed in my post here), but for those unaware, there are yet other bills in California that pose a danger to free use of the internet which we should also keep on the forefront of our minds. 3 of the 4 bills I will mention here will be going up for a hearing in the California Senate Committee on Appropriations, one of the bills is currently being held in suspense file until the suspense file is read and thus will not be up for discussion in the same way as the rest. So that one will remain more on the back burner but still good to call your representatives about nonetheless. (A link on how you can find your reps here).

CA SB 976: Protecting Our Kids From Social Media Addiction Act (Senator Skinner et al)

Building on the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, this bill seeks to make it unlawful for the operator of an addictive 'internet-based service or application' to provide an 'addictive feed' to a user unless the operator doesn't have actual knowledge the user is a minor, has reasonably determined the user isn't a minor, or has obtained verifiable parental consent to provide an addictive feed to a minor user.

Essentially a very complicated and roundabout bill which would be difficult to enforce and would necessitate the usage of age verification for nearly all users. Especially when the alternative is that parents would have to also give up their identifiable information to allow a child to use an online platform. And also limits the ability of a minor user to receive notifications from a service or application during times assumed to be for school attendance or for late night usage. Great potentials for privacy violations and potential dangers for minors in abusive households where parents can exercise greater control over them and what they do. Also does not limit this specifically to social media platforms.

Overall a very unnecessarily complex bill that attempts to solve issues with perceived addictive social media features in inefficient and privacy violating ways.

Currently set for Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on May 13th.

CA SB 1228: User Identity Authentication (Senator Steve Padilla)

Requires social media platforms to verify the identities of people with large social media followings and influence in a tiered system. Nominally to minimize the spread of misinformation during an election year.

"Influential users" are defined as people who either has content that has been seen by more than 50,000 users within a seven-day period across all accounts the user controls on the platform, those with accounts over 15,000 followers, or ranks in the top 6% of users by amount of content viewed by users on the platform within a seven-day period across all their accounts on that platform. These users would be required to provide the platform with their name, telephone number, and email address in order to be considered authenticated.

"Highly influential users" are defined as people whose content has been seen by more than 100,000 users within a seven-day period across all accounts the user controls on the platform, those with accounts over 30,000 followers, or ranks in the top 3% of users by amount of content viewed by users on the platform within a seven-day period across all their accounts on that platform. These users would be required to provide the platform with their name, telephone number, email address, and government-issued identification in order to be considered authenticated.

Supposedly there would be safeguards and rules saying that any information taken to authenticate a user would not be stored or used for anything besides authentication. And they would be marked as authenticated, with the option to block non-authenticated users. But also allows social media companies the option of requiring either of these things even for those who aren't considered influential or highly influential.

Essentially another identity verification measure which should not be allowed to pass, and unnecessarily complicated and unlikely to work in its attempts to prevent misinformation.

Currently set for Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on May 13th.

CA SB 1444: Let Parents Choose Protection Act of 2024 (Senator Stern)

Requires large social media platform providers to create, maintain, and make available third-party safety providers through which parents or guardians are able to control what appears on their child's social media feed.

Another bill which by its sheer existence would put the identities and information of users at risk, both adults and minors. And would likely lead to further age or identity verification measures which would be wholly unnecessary and highly invasive.

CA AB 1949: California Consumer Privacy Act of 2020: collection of personal information of a consumer less than 18 years of age (Assembly Member Lowenthal)

Would remove the conditions that an online business have actual knowledge that the consumer is less than 16 years of age, and would prohibit a business from selling or sharing information of a consumer less than 18 years of age unless the consumer or their parent/guardian has authorized the sale of the personal information. Also requires businesses to inform the consumers of what information is being collected and sold and will not collect additional information. Allows consumers the right to opt out of any sale of personal information, but by default none under 18 may have their information sold.

Also runs the risk of invasive age verification becoming the norm for internet websites, rather than wholesale allowing the opting in and out of sale of personal information to be default for all.

Currently set to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on Suspension File.

With all that said, while I know it may seem like a lot, please look into these bills as much as you can, and send messages to your representatives letting them know you're in opposition to all of them and what they could potentially mean for our internet freedom, privacy, and safety.