Canada wants to join the age verification bandwagon and censor the internet with Bill C-34
1d 21h ago by lemmy.today/u/StopTech in technology from ca.news.yahoo.com
Do you want authoritarianism, because that’s how you get it.
I think it's already here (globally, I mean). The beast is just now confident to show its face.
I think they just don’t care because they know no one will do anything about it. Except protest, which is for losers.
They have been finding that pretty annoying too, they are banning as much of that as they can currently get away with even if its completely ineffective.
Yes that's whah Carney has been paid to want.
What can we do to stop this?
My plan is to just never submit to an age verification. Change servers or self host if necessary. Worse comes to worse, we log off.
That's the spirit.
I'll watch the system burn to the ground before I agree to privacy invasion.
But it won't burn, it will be content to leave you behind.
And so what? Many of us left Reddit because it killed 3rd party apps to force us onto its shitty mobile app. Did it burn without us? No, I doubt they even noticed. Does that make our departure meaningless? Also no, we built something better here.
So it isn't a choice between privacy invasion or watching it burn. It's a choice between privacy invasion and being left behind.
Left behind? If you've deemed a system to be so necessary that refusing to abandon your privacy at its behest means you are condemned to live in obsolescence, then you're only reinforcing the idea that we must surrender our rights for the benefits of the system.
I'm old enough to have lived in a world without the internet and if it's going in a direction that demands I surrender my right to privacy then I'll return to a life without the internet. I won't be alone and just like Lemmy I'm confident we'll build an alternative that aligns with our values.
I have serious doubts that returning to a ludite existence is truly feasible anymore. These companies, along with governments, seem intent on making it a necessity to be online and to do so without privacy.
The CEO of nvidea outright said their plans for the future involve AI agents accessing your financials and PCs being replaced with AI boxes as our interface. If they force AI into enough stuff before the bubble bursts, it won't be a choice. The way the net works will be built for AI, not for users to manually interface with. If the infrastructure is rebuilt for AI, it won't be a choice. With governments all pushing for OS level Id, Microsoft trying to record all user action, the push to ban VPNs, it seems like you will be making that choice sooner than you want.
I hope it works out for you but anyone who remembers a pre-internet life is middle age now and isn't the target market for emerging tech anymore. If AI proves to be significantly advantageous, not being online to sue it will be like refusing to use computers was to the boomers. You'll be outcompeted and lose track of how the world is changing.
You are missing the most important part - no matter who says what, people are still here.
We build the web, we make the food, we build houses. That doesn't go away.
Sure but we build them on the orders of whoever signs our paychecks so we can stay alive. People fuck each other over at their jobs every single day by helping companies succeed at their ambitions. Theoretically we have power in numbers but we rarely even actually use that power.
Sounds like you're trying your hardest to convince yourself that it's worth selling your soul for whatever they're offering. If that's the case then they've already won and it's only a matter of time before your freedoms are stripped away and you willfully become a virtual slave for fear of missing out on whatever prosperity is being promised.
These are the challenges we face, it doesn't serve anything to pretend they don't exist.
What are you even talking about? If anybody is denying the existence of a challenge, it's you through your insistence that there is no future worth living without the unrelenting integration and consumption of technology.
Don't get me wrong, I rely on these technologies as much as the next. In fact, as a software engineer, it's my livelihood and I'm going to support any means to keep it aligned with my own values.
But I also recognize that I am a small fish in a vast ocean and that my most reliable weapon against tyranny is my own free will. If push comes to shove then I can and will simply refuse to follow society into the techno-feudalist hellscape we're moving towards.
You call it being left behind; I call it liberation.
I'm insisting on that at all. If that's what you read, that's perhaps your own fear talking.
I wish I was lucky enough to grow up in those times. Recently a mother almost lost custody of her kid because he was outside on his own.
TBH this is just how it goes in general I think. A small group of people build something neat, and if it attracts enough people then the corporations and money come in, they attract more people and it all goes to shit, then a small amount of people from that group leave and start a new thing. reddit was the neat little alternative thing once.
I suspect eventually we'll probably have to build a second internet lol
Oh I left Reddit because they permabanned me for something that wasn’t even violent and the platform is built specifically to make it hard to appeal and they don’t even give you warning like “take this down or we’ll ban you” you just comment and a few minutes later your account is lost to the ether.
God I hate that place so much.
They did you a favor. It happened to me maybe a month ago and I'm not missing it. I was pretty much down to using one sub only by the time it happened, though, so YMMV I suppose.
Leave us behind? Where is it going?
And what do you do when its a requirement to buy food, submit tax returns, get healthcare?
This is the problem people don’t understand. We have the same issue now in the UK. People think a voluntary system is easy ro just ignore until everything you rely and need forces you to starve or submit.
And its not going to stop at just age verification, it’ll continue until all you get to enjoy is maybe a loaf of bread, and some pond water! 🤦♂️
I might be mistaken, but I don't think a government can force it's citizens to have a phone. There has to be a way to pay your taxes, buy stuff, etc that doesn't rely on you having a phone. Paper money still exists after all.
It might be possible to live disconnected rather than giving away your privacy. You'll have to say goodbye to social media, but I don't see it as a bad thing.
He's talking about the creep. The current legal battles are to establish the framework for all transactions of all kinds to be logged and processed digitally. A precursor to that is establishing a national digital ID.
First its optional and you can avoid things that use it. Then, slowly more things are on it and more and more people capitulate and get one.
Last, they require it for everything, and since they've already got most people to get one, resistance is lukewarm and they get their way.
It really amazes me that people don’t understand this when governments have done it time and time again but hey ho, hopefully I’m old enough that I might at least die before the worst hits because clearly people are to ignorant to do anything to stop it! 😳
Why wouldn't it be able to? That's just a matter of which laws are enacted. And considering government is responsible for proposing and enacting laws, well..
May I introduce you to: the Flock camera
The impact that may have on navigating life seems significant. Have you even considered how that would actually work? Practically.
Vote.
For who? Where? I'm what?
Start with local elections, then move up to provincial and finally national elections. Vote the people in that won’t do this.
Take it a step further and run for election yourself.
Voting won't do shit, the majority of people don't even see the problem with these bills.
And that defeatist mentality is the reason shit doesn’t change.
Not a defeatist mentality. You should strive to change the vote for everyone instead of mindlessly voting yourself.
Vous avez beau ne pas vous occuper de politique, la politique s'occupe de vous tout de même
(You might not care about politics, politics will take care of you nonetheless)
Its unlikely that we will, too many people want this and the elites have created a system that has disempowered people completely. You work around it, with VPNs and use other sites.
Stop voting “strategically” and stop whining about largely made-up NDP critiques. People will voluntarily eat shit just because they heard that the cake on offer doesn’t have any icing.
Better parenting.
That's not a joke. This is a stupid government's way of trying to halt generational harm and decline due to low quality parents. Everything listed is a "if they won't, we'll have to" solution. Unfortunately this means every child gets a Nanny State out of it and it'll fail to work and likely backfire long-term, leading to more nannying.
Stop buying in to the excuses the governments are using to hack at privacy and increase surveillance.
How could you possibly read that as "buying their excuses" when the context is "don't give authoritianism excuses"? Did you make it past two words?
An authority doesn't need much to deploy secundum quid. That's arguably the most used tactic. It's part of the backbone of any authoritarian ideology.
🤦
We're so fucked, lol
Because it has nothing do to with parenting. You make a bizarre claim that there needs to be better parenting, when we both know that parenting has nothing to do with this.
You are suggesting, if I read what you said correctly that somehow they are able to get a foothold for these kinds of bills because of bad parenting. That is not true.
Almost got it.
Point is, it doesn't have to be bad parenting, that's just the narrative. But if not, what is it then? What's the foothold? As far as I can tell, it's to protect children since that's the narrative. How was that foothold given to them? They don't need much to work with. If it were evident there were no foothold, there wouldn't be one.
And, you're exactly right, they would look for another if we had this one defended well. It is evident what the end goal is, but a defence is by minimising chinks in armour. If there were strong contrasting evidence to the very few bad parents, it wouldn't be a foothold—they couldn't use that narrative. But they seem to think there's just enough of a chink for pressing fallacious generalisation.
Everyone knows kids just get around it all anyway, so that's not the point, but they're in because there was enough to make use of secundum quid. That's almost always how authoritarian shifts worked in social history if not outright oppression through violence. We know it's bullshit, but it works like that, unfortunately.
How was that foothold given to them? They don’t need much to work with. If it were evident there were no foothold, there wouldn’t be one.
They don't need one. They will simply make it up. We have seen this over and over. That is why its pointless to even have this discussion.
They don't make them up. They only do that with absolute power or desparation.
Imagine you have no political influence or are directly involved in politics. But you want to ultimately be in a position of authority for personal boon. What's your first move? What moves do you continue to make to get there?
Would making shit up work for you prior to established influence? Or would you pull out the historical playbook and chip away like it's always worked?
At this phase, you're already in sociopolitical influence. You got there by exploiting failed defences of the people already. Murder went from 1 to 2 in your town and you used that for your campaign. You're a mayornow; do whatever you want so long as murder goes back to 1.
Everyone's unhappy with the governor ignoring a single on-topic issue. You hyperfocus on that in your campaign, get the spot. Job done; do whatever again.
You now have influence over topics and the feed people see. Shape that for you by creating issues that aren't really there—just like the murders—but now you can make them issues. Boom, you're in the next phase.
So how to influence next and how to control next? Well, a kid did this horrendous one-off thing, or education performances are falling for many reasons, but the two can be linked through social media and poor parenting of it. Done. Push that one...
At this point you're already so deep in there by just using the same tactic. "Where is there turmoil that I can use to my advantage?" You've beaten democracy, you've beaten narrative, you need to control the next frontier, and there's an in. Hell, in 2026 you're also using the same tactics to get richer and widen the class gap.
So now go back to being a normal person again, how do you make sure that foothold doesn't exist? You just do be better at it to ensure it can't be exploited by the instances of one-off.
You don't have to be a sociopath to beat one, a community and a society just needs to be aware of how they work. They don't have to work hard either, they just need to close up like a herd and do things better to close the gaps. Done long enough, they win through fatiguing those imposing authority AND there's no downside. But it shouldn't need to be said that better parenting shouldy be something that only happens when the parent is unhappy with a state exploiting it.
Yes, that's a long message, but I'm trying to—very simply—makenaware of the much bigger picture of the play and variables. Just saying "This isn't right!" never works and they know that attrition of foot holds at a controlled pace would never result in immediate violence or revolution. History is just available to you as it is to them. Use it.
they dont make them up.
Yes, yes they do. That has been a consistent thing over the last decade, maybe more. Completely fabricate problems to make people believe there is one.
Would making shit up work for you prior to established influence?
Yes. Happens all the time. That is exactly how it has worked recently. Look at the self declared Queen of Canada. She made it all up, lied through her teeth. Not charismatic, not wealthy, but knew how to just repeat bullshit until people believed it. Because they want to believe that someone else is the problem: bad parents, immigrants, whatever.
Because you're trying to work around their excuse. If it's not bad parenting, they'll find some other absurd reason. Don't even try to follow their nonsensical attempts to justify this invasion of privacy, that just gives them more fuel.
Why?
Because being stupid is stupid.
Good explanation....
What explanation are you even asking for? Why shouldn't you believe fucking authoritarian propaganda? lmao??? That's like asking why pushing over old people and laughing at them is bad; if you don't get it, you won't get it.
Either I grossly misinterpreted what you said originally, or a bunch of you are daft.
Explain to me how providing ID to websites is good. Explain to me how this is good for your data privacy. Uploading all your photo ID and whatnot into some private corp or government database, where it absolutely will be linked with your account, which is already grossly tracked across the internet in numerous ways. you're just asking to have your ID attached to your online activities.
Explain to me how OPs comment about better parenting is incorrect. Kids push boundaries and things that are forbidden are enticing.
Furthermore, after you've attached your online profiles to your picture ID, it will be moot because there will be ways around it and the legitimate users end up being the suckers with their ID linked across the internet.
Explain to me how firewalling Canada's internet traffic and monitoring it all is good for us.
This is all just to remove more of your anonymity, which we barely have nowadays anyways.
Explain to me how providing ID to websites is good. Explain to me how this is good for your data privacy. Uploading all your photo ID and whatnot into some private corp or government database, where it absolutely will be linked with your account, which is already grossly tracked across the internet in numerous ways. you're just asking to have your ID attached to your online activities.
You are clearly not reading the same thread I am. No one is defending those concepts; literally the opposite. You asked "why" in response to the statement that believing government propaganda is bad.
Sure, better parenting is good in a general sense, and parents should be mindful of what their kids are watching, but better parenting won't stop governments from invading your privacy because they don't actually do it in order to protect kids. They do it to control people, and they SAY they're doing it to protect kids in order to keep people complacent until it's too late. Believing the government when they say they need to protect kids from media is believing authoritarian propaganda.
I clearly misinterpreted a comment somewhere. Lol.
You fell for their “won’t somebody think of the children?!” propaganda hook, line, and sinker. If they want suckers to let them overreach they just throw out terrorism or children as the reasons and people like you get in line instantly.
It’s not about children. It never was. It’s about getting a mandatory digital ID, where you have zero anonymity on the internet so they can keep you in line by threat of ruining your life and throwing you in jail.
Parents spend less time with their children than the state and culture does. Parents all work 8-10 hours a day, they can't feasibly solve this through parenting, not without ensuring parents have the time and resources necessary to parent. That's also not just to partner in the right directions, but to counter the efforts of billion dollar companies and governments who are all teaching children lessons that drive them in bad directions.
Parenting is not possible in the way it was in the past. Some kind of community parenting may work, but that's an informed concept.
The elites in every country are fighting together to keep us down, while we fight against each other.
There is a simple common problem.
Why does every government want age verification now, what's in it for them? Can't be one started and everyone saw it and thought that's a great idea let's introduce it too?
Because it de facto requires everyone using the internet to provide their identity, which is something that gives authoritarian types a huge boner. Once there is no such thing as anonymous discourse, it becomes trivial to target/arrest/harass/brutalize dissenters or indeed anyone the current regime simply doesn't like.
This amount of surveillance has a really disturbing track record in history. So assuming any politician backing this must be a fascist at heart is the correct approach. These politicians should not be in any position to make any of these decisions. They can't represent democracy when they declare themselves the enemies of it.
It gives any gov a huge boner, not just athoritarians, that's the real problem.
maybe they are secretly authoritarian too
It’s part of the data center push, Palantir, all of it. Centralized info storage so if anyone starts to push back anywhere they know exactly who and where. That and ads. The internet is too anonymous.
It’s the same set of billionaires. A little line between countries doesn’t mean much to them.
It's so blatant too, for anyone with half a brain. We're part of 5 Eyes, there's like 97 data centres being built or already in the late stages of approval here, and all of our internet traffic is controlled by 3 mega ISPs in moustache and glasses. We're already being tracked pretty thoroughly. Conservatives or Liberals, it doesn't matter when it comes to selling Canadians off to foreign corporate entities.
Because the wealthy and the elite think we are on the cusp of a world with a massive labor surplus, no jobs, and nothing to follow it. There will be massive unrest, and so they want to lockdown the internet before that happens, so it will be easier to direct the angry horde at each other rather than at the top where all the issues are actually stemming from.
Because Meta and probably Bloomberg too, bribed them.
Social networks see the writing on the wall and want to create regulatory capture. If they provide the identify verification it is another hook into us.
Surveillance
I suspect it's just their way of inching towards requiring everyone to provide ID to access the internet, they pretty much always wrap this stuff up in some sort of "protect the children" hysteria, so they can accuse anyone who protests it of being a pedophile.
Also Meta is lobbying for it so they can get off the hook for having to moderate their own stuff by shunting the responsibility onto someone else.
Those in power hate the anonymous internet.
Because the things they do make the anonymous internet hate them.
Gabe Newell is a rare example of someone who is rich and has a decent amount of power but still the majority of the internet loves him
Ironic that this is being pushed by "liberals". They don't even bother to live up to their own failing ideology anymore.
Everyone in power wants it. They all say "It's for the children". State govs have already done it for adult sites.
This seems rather pointless from a business standpoint it will hurt many businesses geared towards children such as youtube kids even.
I think anyone thinking about enacting a law like this deserves to be impeached immediately the public have spoken against this and they are more valid arguments than for this.
-
Your ID data can be hacked such as what happened with persona. I don't consider uploading your ID unless you must for a bank, phone provider, government entity, or work. No other business should ever need this info in my opinion.
-
Selfie option will just fuel artificial intelligence. In my opinion they need to outlaw the use of scrapping age verification selfie images for ai.
If I hear anything else about C-34 I'm going to slap the benzos out of Jordan Peterson
They are throwing Bill C-22, (L)Awful Access and C-34 at the same time to confuse low information voters.
Now here's a camera I want full Slo-Mo 4K footage of the Benny's hitting the floor after you slap them out of JP.
I tried warning thee Canadians months ago. The assault is upon the common man. These bastards are going to enslave us and run off with a bunch of cash.
Fucking idiots everywhere
Rule34: don't lock down the Internet
How many lawmakers are publicizing their support for Rule 34 on the internet?
Rule 34 is a famous internet maxim stating: "If it exists, there is porn of it. No exceptions." It asserts that any conceivable subject, fictional character, corporate brand, or inanimate object has been or will be depicted in explicit content somewhere online.
Serious question, can we start building local infrastructure for our own internet via meshtastic and those technologies?
You should check out reticulum if you haven't already. More use cases than just messaging.
We're not already doing that? (No we're not, my node is hella lonely)
Seconding reticulum. Meshtastic is a toy, reticulum is actual infrastructure
Really love how supposed left of centre governments are falling in line to these "age verification" bills, which are bankrolled by anti-LGBT far right groups designed to push LGBTQ kids from public life.
Also love how none of them even stop to think that this was a possibility for why these bills were being pushed when the people pushing them have flat out admitted it.
Yes. Liberals aren't your friends. They appropriated queer politics to do exactly this. People have been warning against this for decades.
They are not being tricked into doing this, this is the second time the Liberal party alone has tried this along with other proposals from Cons and other internet authoritarianism policies like lawful access. They know what it is for and they understand the consequences of who it'll effect. It just so happens queer people (racialized people, indigenous people, disabled people, etc.) are also disproportionately politically active and challenging to liberal capitalism, and liberals have had an exceedingly difficult time shutting that down online through censorship alone.
It is not only distortive but also dangerous to accept that this is out of stupidity and ignorance. They are attacking us. "Elbows up," awards for the people who voted for Carney because they didn't think a minority govt with a stronger NDP presence was possible.
WE NEED
---
online age verification
TO PROTECT CHILDREN
Yeah, once one country has done it, the rest can join in with a flick of a switch.
The big sites are only too happy to hoover up and sell even more data about you.
All the left wing “progressive” WEF-aligned governments falling into line with fascist, authoritarianism while their supporters hilariously call the other side fascists and Nazis 🤣
This is what “progressives” calling for censorship of opposing views leads to. I hope Canadians like going to jail for criticising their government, because that’s where this leads.
In Germany, the left is among the only parties opposing stuff like this, and they have very good arguments against it! The social democrats want to "protect the kids". The CDU is strongly in favor because they think "Teenage Terrorists" are being radicalized online.
*(sources are in German)
Good for Germany. In the UK, Australia, and Canada the left are pushing these authoritarian laws through.
Unpopular opinion but I support the intent of this bill. Kids shouldn't be exposed to algorithmic content. As it's currently written it looks to be limited to platforms with a certain threshold of users. Which might actually encourage fediverse growth. Any slippery slop argument is silly and just benefits Zuck and friends.
Ok so ban personal recommendation algorithms for everyone. The only thing I'd settle for is an opt-in for it if it requires ID.
That would be a good option if the social networks didn't have a long history of acting in bad faith. I think it would be an up hill battle. This seems like a reasonable response
Well, the only solution is horrific mass surveillance then.
Is that seriously your argument? If you're on commercial social media you're already under horrific mass surveillance. Is that you Zuck?
No, my argument is that requiring ID for the Internet is really really really fucking stupid
my argument is that requiring ID for the Internet is really really really fucking stupid
How is that argument at all related to this conversation or the bill? What are you talking about? If this bill passes you will not require ID to user the Internet in Canada. Have you read the bill?
They already have your name, phone number, age, gender and face... and are also tracking your every click and interest, every pause on scrolling, hover of your mouse, your relationships, where you were yesterday, the day before, what you buy....
Kids need parents that dont give them phones and let them browse the internet freely.
Should we require ID to buy kitchen knives too?
This will lead to one thing. Mass surveillance. Worse than it already is.
This will lead to one thing. Mass surveillance. Worse than it already is.
I'm sick of this stupid argument. If you're on commercial social media you're already under mass surveillance FFS 🤦♂️ And if you're arguing that now the government will have access to this data, they already do! Social media platforms already know how old you are, they even know when you're taking a shit. It's just not beneficial for them to take any actions to restrict kids from using their platforms because they need the next generation of addicted users.
Kids need parents that dont give them phones and let them browse the internet freely.
Commercial social media platform are multi billion dollar companies that have built some of the most sophisticated AI/ML algorithms to get people addicted to their platforms. Do you really think the average parent has a chance here? Then consider the network affect. If most of the kids at school are socializing online on these platforms then restricting your child's access limits their socializing. Social media access for kids needs to be limited by governments.
Should we require ID to buy kitchen knives too?
I don't think that would be effective at reducing access for minors given knives are readily available in most kitchens.
Have you read this bill? Are you sure your opinions haven't been manipulated by social media companies that have lobbied hard and flown influencers around to speak on their behalf?
I haven't read the bill, and I don't use any social media other than this. I'm not going to share too much of my personal information, but I have a feeling I may have more personal experience in some of the areas you're referring to.
Also you mention if all the other kids have social media or phones or whatever, then some get left out - well what if people became aware/educated and the tables turned?
My opinions have not been manipulated. I despise social media. I don't have any account except for on here. I just know where this will lead, and I'm not for it.
well what if people became aware/educated and the tables turned?
I'm basing my argument on how the world is, not how the world should be
This is about protecting kids as much as Trump was going to clean the "swamp" or release the Epstein files.
I have read the bill, and it doesn't matter what it says right now because what you read is not going to be what gets signed into law. By the time it gets on the books it will be a butchered piece of shit that will do the opposite of what it claims it will do now.
As for your claim that we should all just be happy with government mandated surveillance, well you can just go tell your 3 letter agency overlords that I am not interested. My options to avoid mass surveillance and having my every word and move tracked may be diminishing at an alarming rate, but I am not going to accelerate it's deterioration just because you are a Steve Job fuckboy who puts down your high score in flappy birds under "computer experience" on your resume.
As for your claim that we should all just be happy with government mandated surveillance
I never made that claim. What the hell are you talking about?! Your whole comment is just the rambles of a mad man
Welcome to Lemmy!