8 ms·

Not every lawmaker is the same and there's more than one way to get a lawmaker's attention. Get more people with you. Or convince a group that's previously es

Not every lawmaker is the same and there's more than one way to get a lawmaker's attention. Get more people with you. Or convince a group that's previously established trust in your jurisdiction to join you in speaking out. Or find out what causes the policymakers do care about and think of a compelling way to frame arguments against age verification in those terms. Heck - if you can get a local government agency to officially back you up, all the better. There's more to politics than just going to town hall meetings or sending emails or making phone calls!

pessimizer 3mo ago
They'll just do that trick where they ignore you while the government starts investigating your tax history and some private contractor starts investigating and reframing your romantic history. Despite this, and despite the fact that all of your communications are monitored, you manage to get a crowd of people to a meeting - where you are allowed to "comment" (i.e. speak, while nobody is obliged to listen to you or react), your crowd makes a lot of joyful noise which is never broadcast on television news, and is deleted within minutes from Tiktok, Facebook, and Youtube for vague policy violations (your third appeal on youtube is accepted, and the video returns to the web a month and a half after it was filmed.) This protest really energizes you all until the vote, when the bill you were protesting passes unanimously. Afterwards, three out of the nine people on the committee lose their seats (the other six weren't up for election that year.) One of them gets a new appointment to a more-powerful higher-paying government job; the second joins a venerable contractor that immediately starts lobbying the state for the contract; and the third, a moron, didn't realize the others were being controlled and ends up assistant manager at a local car dealership. Everything is forgotten by the next election cycle, especially because all of the leaders who showed up at meetings and wrote their representatives were smeared in the media as bad parents with questionable tattoos, and eventually moved away due to loss of employment, housing, and shortly later banking and insurance coverage. There's a real childishness in these 50s-propaganda style views of civics. The only way something gets accomplished like that is if there is no money against it, and your "activism" makes the politician thinks that there might ultimately be money (or money-equivalent) in taking your side. But e.g. $10M is pocket lint to people and organizations pushing this stuff. They can go around like fairies changing everyone's lives who are willing to sell out, and politicians are already pre-configured for that. They've been dreaming all their lives of selling out. Your angry letters to the manager notwithstanding. The reasons these are eventually getting passed have nothing to do with people not speaking up or not getting their lawmaker's attention. They have to do with power, who has it, and who doesn't. It's not about whose the most virtuous and persuasive. The case for age verification is not persuasive, to anyone, and barely makes an attempt to be - they just go immediately into calling people alt-left Chinese pedophile terrorists. It's not because they're dumb. > There's more to politics than just going to town hall meetings or sending emails or making phone calls! Going to town hall meetings, sending emails, and making phone calls is already an enormous amount of work. It is also simply advisory to lawmakers who are not obliged to listen to you or care; trying to get daddy to understand is a good tactic only because daddy loves you. What real politics consists of is threats. You can't threaten somebody who has backing from somebody with a hundred million dollars and an opportunity for more if they get a few votes to go the right way. Even a well-framed argument is a tool to make people who ignore it feel threatened by people who are convinced by it. Where is the threat? There's no political way to stop this. I absolutely believe that the only reason they move even this slowly is because powerful people feel like they could be in personal physical danger if they were near the center of particular decisions or particular acts based on those decisions. It's a waiting and boiling game, where the media and government messaging gradually change public perceptions and attitudes until doing things like age gating the entire internet seem safe to do.
- godwinson__4-8 3mo ago
  This has always been true buddy. No line suddenly emerged in this respect in the 50s. Politics and power are practically synonymous. Sorry you have to try harder before getting to play out your personal physical danger fantasy. Just remember the threat works the other way around. History is riddled with people like you, so ready to get the chance to flip the table over until they realize flying cutlery comes in both directions. We also live in a time were increasingly what one might call the "prevailing order and norms" are being challenged successfully. As of yet this has not been the result of overt threats to the personal safety of those they displaced. The end of history is now satire, and so on. Candidates that would have been considered fringe are increasingly mainstream. Really if anyone is humorously out of date here, it's you. Pessimizer would be more interesting if you weren't so transparently pessimistic. Nice schtick though.
dopidopHN2 3mo ago
I should have clarify, I'm part of a local group, itself part of a network of groups. We don't do politics, we do privacy and security advocacies. It means we work with DSA, MAGA, Libertarian. Allies that normie would known: ACLU, EFF. I talk with those folks weekly. (they talk a lot, themselve ) >There's more to politics than just going to town hall meetings or sending emails or making phone calls! I should have clarify that I despite those circus so much that its our last resort. Its when we need to get them on the recort saying something. 1on1 meeting are always more productive. > if you can get a local government agency to officially back you up, all the better. I should have clarify sorry: I live in the US. That seems unlikely, to say the least.
- rockskon 3mo ago
  > I should have clarify, I'm part of a local group, itself part of a network of groups. Which is great! Though my understanding is a big weakness of the ACLU/EFF/etc... crowd is that they typically pigeonhole themselves. The ACLU immolated its hard-earned partisan-but-principled reputation in the past decade and the EFF has a reputation of keeping non-lefty-libertarians at a very long arm's length away. Beyond that - those groups tend to be sclerotic in their coalition membership. That inflexibility isn't always great! Take the (largely) Progressive-funded Effective Altruist movement - in particular the Center for AI Safety. They are single-minded in their political goals, going so far as to enlist the help of Glenn Beck and Steve-Bannon-associate Joe Allen. They have spun off additional organizations to cater their pro-AI-regulation framing and messaging to different audiences: conservative and biblical messaging to evangelicals, fighting social media disinformation and fascism to progressives, and a hefty dose of civic grassroots rhetoric for their social media presence. They have goals and are willing to make unsavory temporary alliances if it means enacting regulation. I do not see such an appetite to influence politics from most of internet civil liberties organizations. > I should have clarify sorry: I live in the US. That seems unlikely, to say the least. And? Corporate lobbyists do this lobbying-by-proxy crap with decent regularity. Heck - Nintendo is known to have laundered some of its lobbying through NCMEC years back and credit card companies and banks have long laundered their wishlist through various LEAs. Turns out if you get a bureaucrat to convince FBI leadership of the importance of your pet cause and the nexus it has to their agency, legislative pushes in Congress tends to follow. That all said - it works both ways and not necessarily with any negative connotations. The DoJ and FTC in administrations-past have had representatives come to hacker conventions to describe the collaborative efforts they've had with members of the community - to include lobbying congress for legislative change. Getting government agencies on your side as a partner in affecting policy change is relevant only if the change is seen as relevant to a given agency's mission.

pessimizer 3mo ago

They'll just do that trick where they ignore you while the government starts investigating your tax history and some private contractor starts investigating and reframing your romantic history. Despite this, and despite the fact that all of your communications are monitored, you manage to get a crowd of people to a meeting - where you are allowed to "comment" (i.e. speak, while nobody is obliged to listen to you or react), your crowd makes a lot of joyful noise which is never broadcast on television news, and is deleted within minutes from Tiktok, Facebook, and Youtube for vague policy violations (your third appeal on youtube is accepted, and the video returns to the web a month and a half after it was filmed.) This protest really energizes you all until the vote, when the bill you were protesting passes unanimously. Afterwards, three out of the nine people on the committee lose their seats (the other six weren't up for election that year.) One of them gets a new appointment to a more-powerful higher-paying government job; the second joins a venerable contractor that immediately starts lobbying the state for the contract; and the third, a moron, didn't realize the others were being controlled and ends up assistant manager at a local car dealership. Everything is forgotten by the next election cycle, especially because all of the leaders who showed up at meetings and wrote their representatives were smeared in the media as bad parents with questionable tattoos, and eventually moved away due to loss of employment, housing, and shortly later banking and insurance coverage. There's a real childishness in these 50s-propaganda style views of civics. The only way something gets accomplished like that is if there is no money against it, and your "activism" makes the politician thinks that there might ultimately be money (or money-equivalent) in taking your side. But e.g. $10M is pocket lint to people and organizations pushing this stuff. They can go around like fairies changing everyone's lives who are willing to sell out, and politicians are already pre-configured for that. They've been dreaming all their lives of selling out. Your angry letters to the manager notwithstanding. The reasons these are eventually getting passed have nothing to do with people not speaking up or not getting their lawmaker's attention. They have to do with power, who has it, and who doesn't. It's not about whose the most virtuous and persuasive. The case for age verification is not persuasive, to anyone, and barely makes an attempt to be - they just go immediately into calling people alt-left Chinese pedophile terrorists. It's not because they're dumb. > There's more to politics than just going to town hall meetings or sending emails or making phone calls! Going to town hall meetings, sending emails, and making phone calls is already an enormous amount of work. It is also simply advisory to lawmakers who are not obliged to listen to you or care; trying to get daddy to understand is a good tactic only because daddy loves you. What real politics consists of is threats. You can't threaten somebody who has backing from somebody with a hundred million dollars and an opportunity for more if they get a few votes to go the right way. Even a well-framed argument is a tool to make people who ignore it feel threatened by people who are convinced by it. Where is the threat? There's no political way to stop this. I absolutely believe that the only reason they move even this slowly is because powerful people feel like they could be in personal physical danger if they were near the center of particular decisions or particular acts based on those decisions. It's a waiting and boiling game, where the media and government messaging gradually change public perceptions and attitudes until doing things like age gating the entire internet seem safe to do.

godwinson__4-8 3mo ago
This has always been true buddy. No line suddenly emerged in this respect in the 50s. Politics and power are practically synonymous. Sorry you have to try harder before getting to play out your personal physical danger fantasy. Just remember the threat works the other way around. History is riddled with people like you, so ready to get the chance to flip the table over until they realize flying cutlery comes in both directions. We also live in a time were increasingly what one might call the "prevailing order and norms" are being challenged successfully. As of yet this has not been the result of overt threats to the personal safety of those they displaced. The end of history is now satire, and so on. Candidates that would have been considered fringe are increasingly mainstream. Really if anyone is humorously out of date here, it's you. Pessimizer would be more interesting if you weren't so transparently pessimistic. Nice schtick though.

dopidopHN2 3mo ago

I should have clarify, I'm part of a local group, itself part of a network of groups. We don't do politics, we do privacy and security advocacies. It means we work with DSA, MAGA, Libertarian. Allies that normie would known: ACLU, EFF. I talk with those folks weekly. (they talk a lot, themselve ) >There's more to politics than just going to town hall meetings or sending emails or making phone calls! I should have clarify that I despite those circus so much that its our last resort. Its when we need to get them on the recort saying something. 1on1 meeting are always more productive. > if you can get a local government agency to officially back you up, all the better. I should have clarify sorry: I live in the US. That seems unlikely, to say the least.

rockskon 3mo ago
> I should have clarify, I'm part of a local group, itself part of a network of groups. Which is great! Though my understanding is a big weakness of the ACLU/EFF/etc... crowd is that they typically pigeonhole themselves. The ACLU immolated its hard-earned partisan-but-principled reputation in the past decade and the EFF has a reputation of keeping non-lefty-libertarians at a very long arm's length away. Beyond that - those groups tend to be sclerotic in their coalition membership. That inflexibility isn't always great! Take the (largely) Progressive-funded Effective Altruist movement - in particular the Center for AI Safety. They are single-minded in their political goals, going so far as to enlist the help of Glenn Beck and Steve-Bannon-associate Joe Allen. They have spun off additional organizations to cater their pro-AI-regulation framing and messaging to different audiences: conservative and biblical messaging to evangelicals, fighting social media disinformation and fascism to progressives, and a hefty dose of civic grassroots rhetoric for their social media presence. They have goals and are willing to make unsavory temporary alliances if it means enacting regulation. I do not see such an appetite to influence politics from most of internet civil liberties organizations. > I should have clarify sorry: I live in the US. That seems unlikely, to say the least. And? Corporate lobbyists do this lobbying-by-proxy crap with decent regularity. Heck - Nintendo is known to have laundered some of its lobbying through NCMEC years back and credit card companies and banks have long laundered their wishlist through various LEAs. Turns out if you get a bureaucrat to convince FBI leadership of the importance of your pet cause and the nexus it has to their agency, legislative pushes in Congress tends to follow. That all said - it works both ways and not necessarily with any negative connotations. The DoJ and FTC in administrations-past have had representatives come to hacker conventions to describe the collaborative efforts they've had with members of the community - to include lobbying congress for legislative change. Getting government agencies on your side as a partner in affecting policy change is relevant only if the change is seen as relevant to a given agency's mission.