8 ms·

I think everyone has a sour taste left over from decades of half-baked laws written by politicians that don't understand the basics of the internet or technolog

I think everyone has a sour taste left over from decades of half-baked laws written by politicians that don't understand the basics of the internet or technology in general. With that said, I also don't understand the issues people are having with this.

newaccount7hhhf 2y ago
What laws are you talking about? The Internet has grown a lot that’s largely because we have smart politicians and strong institutions. I really think the regulation of the Internet has been amazingly good.
- donbateman 2y ago
  [flagged]
- Kye 2y ago
  For example: CAN-SPAM. If I want to send emails to a list, I have to burn $90 of my scarce dollars every year just for a PO box for the address at the bottom on the off chance someone sends a letter to unsubscribe. Unless I want to put my home address in every email, which I don't, and no one should. Unsubscribe links and highly effective spam filters were already completely standard when the law was passed in 2003. It doesn't matter if the email you send doesn't actually require it because every mailing list provider requires it.
  - loeg 2y ago
    Eh, unsubscribe links were definitely not universal in 2003 and they barely are today. But the situation has definitely improved in the last 20 years.
    - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
      The point is the rules are daft. A sensible rule would require a functioning unsubscribe process in the email, which every piece of software would then automate as an unsubscribe link. The actual rule requires people to be able to unsubscribe via a postal mailing address, which is unreasonable and ridiculous.
      - loeg 2y ago
        I'm just saying, your earlier comment would have been better without the sentence: "Unsubscribe links and highly effective spam filters were already completely standard when the law was passed in 2003."
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        The person you're replying to is not the person you're quoting. But also, the people with unsubscribe links now but not in 2002 would still commonly send their messages from a consistent address, making it easy to block them if you wanted to, and making even primitive spam filters highly effective against them. Meanwhile the people who randomize their from address to prevent this are the people who still don't have a functioning unsubscribe link.
      - webspinner 2y ago
        Yeah, who wants to do that? I don't want to, no one wants to. It's a stupid law!
- jovial_cavalier 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agre... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM
  - webspinner 2y ago
    Yep, all of those need to go the way of the creamitorium!!!! You forgot FISA and CISA though, how'd you do that.
logifail 2y ago
> With that said, I also don't understand the issues people are having with this. The regulation "requir[es] U.S. Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) providers of IaaS products to verify the identity of their foreign customers" Q: How would one propose to determine if a customer is foreign or not? A checkbox, perhaps? <rolls eyes> No bad actor would possibly pretend to be a domestic customer, of course... <rolls eyes again>
- refulgentis 2y ago
  That's a strawman. <rolls eyes> It won't be a checkbox, of course... <rolls eyes again>
  - logifail 2y ago
    > That's a strawman [..] OK, I'll bite. How exactly are [US] domestic users of services supposed to prove they don't need to prove their identity? EDIT: it reminds me of the Common Travel Area (between Ireland and of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), which has some glorious inconsistencies. For instance that nationals of Ireland and the UK travelling between those two countries do not need a passport, except when you take an international flight and rock up at IE/UK border control it's fairly hard to prove you are a national who doesn't need to provide a passport without having ... a passport (or equivalent ID).
    - refulgentis 2y ago
      KYC stands for Know Your Customer, and is a core regulation in banking. So we can pivot off that and work through what a bank does to verify your identity. I signed up for a Mercury bank account a few months back for my Delaware corporation without talking to anyone, so I'll use that as a template. I can't remember the exact steps, but tl;dr submit a passport photo / driver's license photo and a photo I take in the app itself. If it was a not-US passport, then they'd dig into a full verification, not just a quick manual check of "is that face the same as the passport/license, is the passport/license ID # valid, and are the photos edited"
ranger_danger 2y ago
I wonder how they deal with the (hopefully) constant abuse reports aimed at them from providers who are tired of their shady customers doing shady things from their IPs.
- webspinner 2y ago
  They wouldn't.
webspinner 2y ago
You don't understand the issues me as a blind person has with it? OK I have to upload a government ID every time I want to use an internet service. That's stupid. It's also considered a general warrant, and I thought we did away with those long ago.

newaccount7hhhf 2y ago

What laws are you talking about? The Internet has grown a lot that’s largely because we have smart politicians and strong institutions. I really think the regulation of the Internet has been amazingly good.

donbateman 2y ago
[flagged]
Kye 2y ago
For example: CAN-SPAM. If I want to send emails to a list, I have to burn $90 of my scarce dollars every year just for a PO box for the address at the bottom on the off chance someone sends a letter to unsubscribe. Unless I want to put my home address in every email, which I don't, and no one should. Unsubscribe links and highly effective spam filters were already completely standard when the law was passed in 2003. It doesn't matter if the email you send doesn't actually require it because every mailing list provider requires it.
- loeg 2y ago
  Eh, unsubscribe links were definitely not universal in 2003 and they barely are today. But the situation has definitely improved in the last 20 years.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    The point is the rules are daft. A sensible rule would require a functioning unsubscribe process in the email, which every piece of software would then automate as an unsubscribe link. The actual rule requires people to be able to unsubscribe via a postal mailing address, which is unreasonable and ridiculous.
    - loeg 2y ago
      I'm just saying, your earlier comment would have been better without the sentence: "Unsubscribe links and highly effective spam filters were already completely standard when the law was passed in 2003."
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        The person you're replying to is not the person you're quoting. But also, the people with unsubscribe links now but not in 2002 would still commonly send their messages from a consistent address, making it easy to block them if you wanted to, and making even primitive spam filters highly effective against them. Meanwhile the people who randomize their from address to prevent this are the people who still don't have a functioning unsubscribe link.
    - webspinner 2y ago
      Yeah, who wants to do that? I don't want to, no one wants to. It's a stupid law!
jovial_cavalier 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agre... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM
- webspinner 2y ago
  Yep, all of those need to go the way of the creamitorium!!!! You forgot FISA and CISA though, how'd you do that.

logifail 2y ago

> With that said, I also don't understand the issues people are having with this. The regulation "requir[es] U.S. Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) providers of IaaS products to verify the identity of their foreign customers" Q: How would one propose to determine if a customer is foreign or not? A checkbox, perhaps? <rolls eyes> No bad actor would possibly pretend to be a domestic customer, of course... <rolls eyes again>

refulgentis 2y ago
That's a strawman. <rolls eyes> It won't be a checkbox, of course... <rolls eyes again>
- logifail 2y ago
  > That's a strawman [..] OK, I'll bite. How exactly are [US] domestic users of services supposed to prove they don't need to prove their identity? EDIT: it reminds me of the Common Travel Area (between Ireland and of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), which has some glorious inconsistencies. For instance that nationals of Ireland and the UK travelling between those two countries do not need a passport, except when you take an international flight and rock up at IE/UK border control it's fairly hard to prove you are a national who doesn't need to provide a passport without having ... a passport (or equivalent ID).
  - refulgentis 2y ago
    KYC stands for Know Your Customer, and is a core regulation in banking. So we can pivot off that and work through what a bank does to verify your identity. I signed up for a Mercury bank account a few months back for my Delaware corporation without talking to anyone, so I'll use that as a template. I can't remember the exact steps, but tl;dr submit a passport photo / driver's license photo and a photo I take in the app itself. If it was a not-US passport, then they'd dig into a full verification, not just a quick manual check of "is that face the same as the passport/license, is the passport/license ID # valid, and are the photos edited"

ranger_danger 2y ago

I wonder how they deal with the (hopefully) constant abuse reports aimed at them from providers who are tired of their shady customers doing shady things from their IPs.

webspinner 2y ago
They wouldn't.

webspinner 2y ago

You don't understand the issues me as a blind person has with it? OK I have to upload a government ID every time I want to use an internet service. That's stupid. It's also considered a general warrant, and I thought we did away with those long ago.