#online verification

[digikartik-blog]

UP Board Marksheet Download PDF & Online Verification

In the digital age, accessing academic records like the UP Board Marksheet has become increasingly convenient thanks to advancements in technology and the availability of school management software like Vedmarg ERP. This article explores the process to Download UP Board Marksheet PDF and performing online verification through Vedmarg ERP, highlighting the benefits of this streamlined approach. 

Vedmarg ERP Software revolutionizes the way educational institutions manage student data and academic records. One of its standout features is the ability to generate UP Board Marksheet PDFs effortlessly. School administrators can access the marksheet generation module within the ERP system, input student data, and generate mark sheets with just a few clicks. This streamlined process eliminates the need for manual paperwork and reduces the administrative burden on school staff. 

Downloading UP Board Marksheet PDFs through Vedmarg ERP offers numerous benefits. Firstly, it ensures accuracy and authenticity in marksheet generation, as the software adheres to UP Board guidelines and standards. This guarantees that mark sheets of UP board 10th result & 12th result reflect the student's actual performance and are accepted as official documents by educational institutions, employers, and other organizations. 

Moreover, Vedmarg ERP Software prioritizes data security and confidentiality. Student information is encrypted and stored securely within the system, protecting it from unauthorized access or tampering. This instills confidence among students, parents, and stakeholders, knowing that their data is safeguarded throughout the process. 

In addition to downloading mark sheets, Vedmarg ERP Software facilitates online verification of UP Board Marksheet PDFs. Educational institutions, employers, or other organizations can verify the authenticity of mark sheets by accessing Vedmarg's online verification portal. Here, they can input the necessary details from the mark sheet and receive instant confirmation of its validity. 

Online verification through Vedmarg ERP enhances efficiency and transparency in the verification process. It eliminates the need for manual verification procedures, such as contacting schools or requesting physical copies of mark sheets. This saves time and resources for both the verifying party and the student, enabling swift and reliable verification of academic credentials. 

Furthermore, Vedmarg ERP Software offers seamless integration with other educational modules, such as attendance tracking, exam management, and student information systems. This comprehensive approach to school management ensures that academic records are synchronized across different modules, reducing redundancy and improving data accuracy. 

In conclusion, downloading UP Board Marksheet PDFs and performing online verification through Vedmarg ERP Software offers a convenient, secure, and efficient solution for managing academic records. By leveraging technology-driven solutions, educational institutions can streamline administrative processes, enhance data security, and provide better services to students and stakeholders. With Vedmarg ERP, the journey towards digital transformation in education continues to evolve, empowering schools to thrive in the digital age.

[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

[botgal]

Update on AB 3080 and AB 1949

AB 3080 (age verification for adult websites and online purchase of products and services not allowed for minors) and AB 1949 (prohibiting data collection on individuals less than 18 years of age) both officially have hearing dates for the California Senate Judiciary Committee.

The hearing date for these bills is scheduled to be Tuesday 07/02/2024. Which means that the deadline to turn in position letters is going to be noon one week before the hearing on 06/25/2024. It's not a lot of time from this moment, but I'm certain we can each turn one in before then

Remember that position letters should be single topic, in strict opposition of what each bill entails. Keep on topic and professional when writing them. Let us all do our best to keep these bills from leaving committee so that we don't have to fight them on the Senate floor. But let's also not stop sending correspondence to our state representatives anyway.

Remember, the jurisdiction of the Senate Judiciary Committee is as follows.

"Bills amending the Civil Code, Code of Civil Procedure, Evidence Code, Family Code, and Probate Code. Bills relating to courts, judges, and court personnel. Bills relating to liens, claims, and unclaimed property. Bills relating to privacy and consumer protection."

Best of luck everyone. And thank you for your efforts to fight this so far.

Below is linked the latest versions of the bills.

Below are the links to the Committee's homepage which gives further information about the Judiciary Committee, and the page explaining further in depth their letter policy.

Edit: Was requested to add in information such as why these bills are bad and what sites could potentially be affected by these bills. So here's the explanation I gave in asks.

Why are these bills bad?

Both bills are essentially age verification requirement laws. AB 3080 explicitly, and AB 1949 implicitly.

AB 3080 strictly is calling for dangerous age verification requirements for both adult websites and any website which sells products or services which it is illegal for minors to access in California. While this may sound like a good idea on paper, it's important to keep in mind that any information that's put online is at risk of being extracted and used by bad actors like hackers. Even if there are additional requirements by the law that data be deleted after its used for its intended purpose and that it not be used to trace what websites people access. The former of which provides very little protection from people who could access the databases of identification that are used for verification, and the latter which is frankly impossible to completely enforce and could at any time reasonably be used by the government or any surveying entity to see what private citizens have been looking at since their ID would be linked to the access and not anonymized.

AB 1949 is nominally to protect children from having their data collected and sold without permission on websites. However by restricting this with an age limit it opens up similar issues wherein it could cause default requirements for age verification for any website so that they can avoid liability by users and the state.

What websites could they affect?

AB 3080, according to the bill's text, would affect websites which sells the types of items listed below

"

(b) Products or services that are illegal to sell to a minor under state law that are subject to subdivision (a) include all of the following:

(1) An aerosol container of paint that is capable of defacing property, as referenced in Section 594.1 of the Penal Code.

(2) Etching cream that is capable of defacing property, as referenced in Section 594.1 of the Penal Code.

(3) Dangerous fireworks, as referenced in Sections 12505 and 12689 of the Health and Safety Code.

(4) Tanning in an ultraviolet tanning device, as referenced in Sections 22702 and 22706 of the Business and Professions Code.

(5) Dietary supplement products containing ephedrine group alkaloids, as referenced in Section 110423.2 of the Health and Safety Code.

(6) Body branding, as referenced in Sections 119301 and 119302 of the Health and Safety Code.

(c) Products or services that are illegal to sell to a minor under state law that are subject to subdivision (a) include all of the following:

(1) Firearms or handguns, as referenced in Sections 16520, 16640, and 27505 of the Penal Code.

(2) A BB device, as referenced in Sections 16250 and 19910 of the Penal Code.

(3) Ammunition or reloaded ammunition, as referenced in Sections 16150 and 30300 of the Penal Code.

(4) Any tobacco, cigarette, cigarette papers, blunt wraps, any other preparation of tobacco, any other instrument or paraphernalia that is designed for the smoking or ingestion of tobacco, products prepared from tobacco, or any controlled substance, as referenced in Division 8.5 (commencing with Section 22950) of the Business and Professions Code, and Sections 308, 308.1, 308.2, and 308.3 of the Penal Code.

(5) Electronic cigarettes, as referenced in Section 119406 of the Health and Safety Code.

(6) A less lethal weapon, as referenced in Sections 16780 and 19405 of the Penal Code."

This is stated explicitly to include "internet website on which the owner of the internet website, for commercial gain, knowingly publishes sexually explicit content that, on an annual basis, exceeds one-third of the contents published on the internet website". Wherein "sexually explicit content" is defined as "visual imagery of an individual or individuals engaging in an act of masturbation, sexual intercourse, oral copulation, or other overtly sexual conduct that, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

This would likely not include websites like AO3 or any website which displays NSFW content not in excess of 1/3 of the content on the site. Possibly not inclusive of writing because of the "visual imagery", but don't know at this time. In any case we don't want to set a precedent off of which it could springboard into non-commercial websites or any and all places with NSFW content.

AB 1949 is a lot more broad because it's about general data collection by any and all websites in which they might sell personal data collected by the website to third parties, especially if aimed specifically at minors or has a high chance of minors commonly accesses the site. But with how broad the language is I can't say there would be ANY limits to this one. So both are equally bad and would require equal attention in my opinion.

[trying414]

I've said it once, I will say it again. Censorship will NEVER be equivalent to safety.

I swear this country gets more and more regressive, strict, and dictatorship-like by the day at this point. And it. Is. DISGUSTING.

I cannot wait for the younger generation to take over because they actually give a damn and know how things work.

[dsabian]

Australia is planning on banning under 16s from using social media.

So so many reasons this is a stupid idea but the main one is actually, counter-intuitively, ppl's online safety.

Grown ups know how to cross the road safely because they are taught as children. They get to practice with parental supervision when they're kids.

You keep kids off social media then give them unlimited access at 16 and they'll have no frame of reference, no supervision, no working knowledge of how to fact check etc. If you actually want ppl to be safe online, make it part of education.

When discussing Animal Farm in English, talk about how to analyse ideas that sound good but actually result in inequality in practice and then pull up some questionable tweets.

When teaching kids how to research for their next essay, give them a fb rant and show them how to verify the info.

And then whoever is teaching them about personal responsibility should introduce them to tag blocking on tumblr. Show them how to curate their own experience.

Chat gtp should be its own module titled "ai can and will lie to you please for the love of god learn to think for yourself"

[gingersn4pp]

apparently bsky is open now so. I MIGHT AS WELL. i'll stay here on tumblr most of the time but might post doodles more often or smth (rather than wait to cherry pick the best sketches for a dump here haha)

[recreationaldivorce]

they say that there's a point where you can have too much security and it impedes the usability of a system—however i'd like to commend online banking platforms for somehow simultaneously having security measures that make them incredibly inconvenient to use every day, whilst also offering fairly low actual security and being not particularly difficult to bypass if you're dedicated enough

[spacedlexi]

forced to write fic today now that im locked out of csp with its dumbass verification system

[morgue-xiiv]

Debit cards with my bank now print the card number and expiry date on the BACK of the card, instead of the front. Now, presuming you're smarter than a nematode worm you might logically assume they also moved the CVC and signature to the front of the card, so that you didn't have literally all the information needed to do credit card fraud visible at once. But no! They just decided to keep it all on one side. Like fucking idiots. Now if you want to steal someone's credit card info you only need to see one side of their card long enough to photograph it. In fact someone could easily modify a contactless card reader to have a pinhole camera in it that takes a photo when someone taps their card, since all the information you need to make a purchase would be visible from that angle. Like why did they think the CVC was on the back in the first place? Is everyone working at Visa Debit a fucking idiot or something???

[ambersky0319]

I'm debating if it would just be easier to get a whole new phone/phone number and just have my grandpa cancel my line once I get it

[1800loan-store]

Swift & Secure: Get Your Approved Title Loan Quote Online with 1800LoanStore

Get approved for a quick title loan quote online with 1800LoanStore. No income verification needed. Swift approval at affordable rates. Explore bad credit loans, even for salvage title cars. Easy title loans, no credit check required. Secure your financial relief now.

[columbuscartitleloan]

Get Quick Title Loan Quotes Online in Ohio | Columbus Car Title Loan

Explore Columbuscartitleloan for easy Title loans online in Ohio. Get quotes for bad credit, salvage titles, rebuilt cars, and more. No credit checks, fast approvals.

[titleloansonline]

Fast & Easy Title Loan Approval Without Income Verification | TitleLoansOnline

Easy application, fast approval, and no credit check. Apply nationwide for car title loan today at www.titleloansonline.com

[botgal]

California Internet Bills Status 8/9/2024

As of right now, here's the status of the three primary internet bills of note.

AB 3080, age verification for nsfw websites. Currently has been improved its terms so that metadata and other methods to better filtering as parental controls is allowed as an option rather than always age verification via ID and credit card transactions. However, it's best to still nip this one in the bud if possible. So I'd still recommend messaging your reps about it.

This bill went through second reading, but has been re-referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The hearing is scheduled for August 12th. You can find your members in the link below. So best to call them before that date if they're a part of the committee.

AB 1949, surrounding collecting personal data of those less than 18 years of age with risks of age verification due to broad language, has been sent to the Senate Suspense File and is awaiting the vote. There's no set date on the Senate website for it, but the Assembly Suspense date is listed as August 15th, so best assumption for now is that it will be on the same day. So call your Senate reps for these as well if they're a part of the Appropriations Committee (see the link above).

Lastly, SB 976, regarding age restricting "addictive" algorithms and time restricting access to social media platforms for individuals under 18. Very likely leading to age verification. Has been placed on the Assembly Suspense file for August 15th. If you have tim please call your Assembly member if they're a part of the Appropriations committee as listed below.

Thank you again for taking your time to voice your opinions and help keep our internet safe.

[freezenet]

The US KOSA Legislation is a Threat to Free Speech, Critics Warn

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is currently working its way through Congress in the US. It is an obvious threat to free speech according to critics. Continue reading Untitled