• @i_am_not_a_robot@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    33 months ago

    large companies who can afford the security infra to do those checks and store that data

    There is no such company. This is just another way to ban “harmful” content. Verifying your identity and age to access restricted content is practically guaranteed to result in your identity being compromised within your lifetime.

    • @t3rmit3@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I never said afford to protect it, just to comply with the requirements for doing the checks and storing it. Passing SOC2 or PCI-DSS (if you’re doing verification via payment card) or whatever certification they decide to create to attest to this stuff, doesn’t make you more secure in reality, but if you can’t afford to do those attestations in the first place, you’re out of the game.

      This is just another way to ban “harmful” content.

      That is true, but it’s not the whole picture. KOSA applies a Duty of Care requirement for all sites, whether they intend to have adult (or “harmful”) content or not.

      So your local daycare’s website that has a comment section could be (under the Senate version that has no business size limits) taken to court if someone posts something “harmful”. That’s not something they or other small sites can afford, so those sites will either remove all UGC or shutter, rather than face that legal liability.

      The real goal of KOSA (and the reason it’s being backed by Xitter, Snap, and Microsoft) is to kill off smaller platforms entirely, to force everyone into their ecosystems. And they’re willing to go along with the right-wing censorship nuts to do it. This is a move by big-tech in partnership with the Right, because totalitarianism is a political monopoly, and companies love monopolies.