So right now is a great time to contact your legislators!
It’s still not clear just what will get voted on. So, if you're in the US, now's a great time to contact Congress. EFF’s action Tell Congress: Absent Major Changes, 702 Should Not be Renewed has as a form that will connect you nd provides talking points. Or if you’d rather contact them directly, here’s a short script:
> “Stop the FBI from spying on innocent Americans. Please fight for a vote to reform FISA’s Section 702 with warrant requirements, both for Section 702 data and for our sensitive, personal information sold to the government by data brokers. And please oppose any attempt to reauthorize FISA Section 702 that doesn’t include both of these critical reforms.”
You can either call the Congressional switchboard at (202) 224-3121 or use the House directory to look up your legislators’ contact info.
So right now is a great time to contact your legislators!
It’s still not clear just what will get voted on. So, if you're in the US, now's a great time to contact Congress. EFF’s action Tell Congress: Absent Major Changes, 702 Should Not be Renewed has as a form that will connect you nd provides talking points. Or if you’d rather contact them directly, here’s a short script:
> “Stop the FBI from spying on innocent Americans. Please fight for a vote to reform FISA’s Section 702 with warrant requirements, both for Section 702 data and for our sensitive, personal information sold to the government by data brokers. And please oppose any attempt to reauthorize FISA Section 702 that doesn’t include both of these critical reforms.”
You can either call the Congressional switchboard at (202) 224-3121 or use the House directory to look up your legislators’ contact info.
Great writeup! A couple thoughts:
First & foremost, which is somewhat glossed over, is the notion that ordinary people will have the knowledge or interest in deploying their own Personal Data Servers. This isn’t really touched on from what I’ve seen in their documentation, despite it being touted as such a major benefit of the architecture.
Very true. There's a line buried in their white paper that "we expect that most users will sign up for an account on a shared PDS run by a professional hosting provider – either Bluesky Social PBC, or another company" but they very much do tout it as a major benefit. It's certainly true that the ability to move your data around is a very good thing, and something the fediverse is bad at today, so from a positioning perspective it makes sense to focus on this; their claims that this gives the user power are, um, exaggerated.
due to the high volumes of data involved, there are likely to be fewer Relays deployed instead of many.
Yeah I was in in a discussion where a Bluesky developer suggested that non-profits might run their own Relays ... seems unlikely to me, both because of the volume and because of the risk of potentially relaying content that's legal in whatever jurisdiction the PDS is in but not in the Relay's jurisdication. Of course Relays don't have to be for the full network, so we might see more smaller-scoped Relays (although I'm not sure how that differs from a Feed Generator), but if BlueSky and a few others provide the only full-network Relay, that's a pretty powerful position for them to be in.
Also in that conversation the said that AppViews are likely to be even more resource-intensive than Relays, and so anybody developing an AppView might as well have a Relay as well, so there's likely to be the same kind of power concentration.
That said I think it's very good that Relays explicitly appear in their architecture. Relays are also critical for smaller or less-connected instances in today's fediverse, but don't get a lot of attention.
Arguably this may make the AuthTransfer network no more decentralized (they go back & forth on describing their approach as decentralized and distributed) than the ActivityPub network is.
Yep. They've split the functions of the ActivityPub instance, but it seems to me that they've just shifted the power imbalances around, and potentially magnified them.
Agreed, this is awesome. Love the suggestions about conventions.
There was an interesting pair of polls last summer about reactions to Threads and Tumblr. 66% of the respondents were either opposed to or alarmed by Threads federating, and only 10% were supportive. By contrast, only 15% were opposed to or alarmed by Tumblr, and 39% were supportive. It's just one data point but still interesting!
Right. And that's why I'm on blahaj.zone!
For many thought it's not that simple: they're okay with Meta housing hate groups as long as it doesn't directly lead to users on their instances being harassed. And it wouldn't surprise me that if harassment starts happening it'll still turn out not to be that simple for them because there are a lot more non-harassing accounts than harassing accounts
Totally agree. Back in June I wrote about the reasons the FediPact was good strategy and started it with
Most importantly, it counters the gaslighting that resistance is futile. The segment of the fediverse that wants to reject Meta is clearly large enough that it will survive no matter what the big Mastodon instances and pundits do.
Agreed that figuring out the right action is important! It's clear from the conversation so far that a lot of instances are going to defederate, and a lot of instances are going to federate, so any strategy needs to take that into account.
I talked with a lot of people about this when I wrote Should the Fediverse welcome its new surveillance-capitalism overlords? Opinions differ! and don't think it's the case that we share the same goals. Some people see increasing the size of the ActivityPub network as a goal in and of itself (and generally support federation); others are in the fediverse because they want nothing to do with Facebook or Meta (so unsurprisingly support defederation). And some people have a goal of communicating with people on Threads -- friends, relatives, celebrities, etc; others don't. So again, these different goals are something to take into account.
Wanting to stay federated DOES NOT mean the user wants to help Meta or thinks that Meta is here for our benefit.
That's correct, but many of the people I've seen arguing in favor of federation do seem to think Meta's looking for a win/win situation where the fediverse benefits as much or more than Meta. And conversely many would argue that wanting to stay federated means the user is helping Meta whether they want to or not.
Threads has begun connecting to the fediverse.
The House GOP leadership pulled both FISA bills!
Instead, a four-month extension is attached to the NDAA -- unless it gets removed. Dozens of civil rights and racial justice groups oppose extending FISA in the NDAA.
If you agree, call your Senators TODAY and with a simple ask: "DO NOT put 702 in the NDAA.".
(The Congressional switchboard is at (202) 224-3121, or you can use the Senate directory to find their direct number and web contact form.)
The speaker is greenlighting a procedural gambit that allows members to decide which bill to renew a controversial surveillance authority will move forward, based on which gets more votes on the floor.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/6414337
The Judiciary bill has significant reforms, including a warrant requirement. The Intelligence bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing -- it would significantly expand warrantless surveillance. If you're in the US, now's a key time to contact Congress! EFF's got a form that makes it easy, or see Get FISA Right's post for phone numbers and a short script.
The speaker is greenlighting a procedural gambit that allows members to decide which bill to renew a controversial surveillance authority will move forward, based on which gets more votes on the floor.
The Judiciary bill has significant reforms, including a warrant requirement. The Intelligence bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing -- it would significantly expand warrantless surveillance. If you're in the US, now's a key time to contact Congress! EFF's got a form that makes it easy, or see Get FISA Right's post for phone numbers and a short script.
FISA Section 702’s authority for warrantless surveillance expires at the end of the year unless it’s reauthorized. With Congress leaving DC on December 15, there’s a lot of actio…
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/9011376
Congress is expected to vote this week on various bills to reauthorise FISA Section 702 warrantless wiretapping. The House Intelligence committee's bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing -- it would significantly expand warrantless surveillance. If you're in the US, now's a key time to contact Congress! EFF's got a form that makes it easy, or see the article for phone numbers and a short script.
It depends if I've turned on "approve followers" -- upvote if you agree!
No, followers-only posts are not public -- upvote if you agree!
Yes, followers-only posts are public -- upvote if you agree!
Are followers-only posts public? A poll Followers-only posts are only visible to your followers -- and to admins of any instances your followers on. But if you haven't turned on "approve followes", anybody who's logged in to an instance you haven't blocked can folloow you and get access to your f...
On Mastodon, Followers-only posts are only visible to your followers -- and to admins of any instances your followers on. But if you haven't turned on "approve followes", anybody who's logged in to an instance you haven't blocked can follow you and get access to your followers-only posts.
In your view, are followers-only posts public?
The linked post is a Mastodon poll, and I'll also put in replies here so that you can just upvote the ones you agree with!
You're right ... but tech has a lot of lobbying power and they are very very very strongly against a strong privacy bill, or even a bill that would regulate algorithms. So it's easier for legislators to pass something like KOSA -- or pass a weak privacy bill that will actually make the situation worse by getting rid of laws like California's -- and claim they're doing something.
The Kids Online Safety Act, aimed at protecting children from harmful online content, has been endorsed by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, as well as by President Joe Biden.
> In a video recently published by the conservative group Family Policy Alliance, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said “protecting minor children from the transgender in this culture” should be among the top priorities of conservative lawmakers.... > > In the same minute-and-a-half video, Blackburn lauded the Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA, a bipartisan bill introduced in May that would allow parents to sue social media companies and other online platforms if they do not sufficiently shield children under the age of 13 from harmful content on their platforms. The measure was introduced by Blackburn and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and has been endorsed by President Joe Biden.
https://www.stopkosa.com/ makes it easy to contact your lawmakers if you're in the US. It's not too late to stop KOSS -- but we're going to have to make some noise!
The lead sponsor of the "Kids Online Safety Act," known as KOSA, has stated that it will be used to "protect minor children from the transgender in our culture" in an interview released this weekend.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/4403827
> Senator Admits "Kids Online Safety Act" Will Target Trans Content Online.::The lead sponsor of the "Kids Online Safety Act," otherwise known as KOSA, has stated over the weekend that it will be used to "protect minor children from the transgender in our culture."
Critics warn KOSA could trigger widespread censorship, privacy concerns.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/1835889
> Evan Greer of Fight for the Future: > > "If KOSA were actually a privacy bill as its supporters claim, we would be all about it," Greer told Ars. "We support cracking down on tech companies harvesting of data, we support an end to manipulative business practices like autoplay, infinite scroll, intrusive notifications, and algorithmic recommendations powered by commercial surveillance. What we don't support is a bill that gives state attorneys general the power to dictate what content younger people can see on social media. That's where KOSA goes off the rails and becomes a censorship bill, rather than a privacy bill." > > If you're in the US, you can contact Congress using https://www.stopkosa.com/
Critics warn KOSA could trigger widespread censorship, privacy concerns.
Evan Greer of Fight for the Future:
"If KOSA were actually a privacy bill as its supporters claim, we would be all about it," Greer told Ars. "We support cracking down on tech companies harvesting of data, we support an end to manipulative business practices like autoplay, infinite scroll, intrusive notifications, and algorithmic recommendations powered by commercial surveillance. What we don't support is a bill that gives state attorneys general the power to dictate what content younger people can see on social media. That's where KOSA goes off the rails and becomes a censorship bill, rather than a privacy bill."
If you're in the US, you can contact Congress using https://www.stopkosa.com/
yeah it's really disappointing.
Advocates say the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) will be weaponized to censor LGBTQ content.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/1560280
> The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is a bipartisan bill that lawmakers say is intended to stop online platforms from targeting and recommending harmful content to minors. It sounds good but it's supported by a slew of far-right, anti-LGBTQ organizations, and opponents are warning it will enable states to censor LGBTQ content by claiming it leads kids to depression, anxiety, and eating disorders. > > If you're in the US, EFF has a page that makes it easy to Tell Congress: KOSA Will Censor the Internet But Won't Help Kids > > And once you've done that, please consider calling your Senators and tell them to oppose the Kids Online Safety Act because it won't help keep kids safe and it'll harm LGBTQ teens. Here's a list of Senators' phone numbers.
Advocates say the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) will be weaponized to censor LGBTQ content.
The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is a bipartisan bill that lawmakers say is intended to stop online platforms from targeting and recommending harmful content to minors. It sounds good but it's supported by a slew of far-right, anti-LGBTQ organizations, and opponents are warning it will enable states to censor LGBTQ content by claiming it leads kids to depression, anxiety, and eating disorders.
If you're in the US, EFF has a page that makes it easy to Tell Congress: KOSA Will Censor the Internet But Won't Help Kids
And once you've done that, please consider calling your Senators and tell them to oppose the Kids Online Safety Act because it won't help keep kids safe and it'll harm LGBTQ teens. Here's a list of Senators' phone numbers.
We’ve talked a lot about KOSA, the “Kids Online Safety Act” that has massive bipartisan support in Congress. The latest version was introduced with 26 Senators as sponsors or co-sponsors. We’ve exp…
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/1170157
> KOSA, the "Kids Online Safety Act", sounds good. Who doesn't want to keep kids safe? But as over 90 LGBTQ and human rights organizations said last year, KOSA would harm LGBTQ+ youth especially, and could be weaponized by Attorneys General to censor online resources and information for queer and trans youth, people seeking reproductive healthcare, and more. > > And it's not just a hypothetical concern! This article from a couple months ago includes a screenshot of a Heritage Foundation tweet talking about how they'll KOSA to attack trans-related content -- because after all, they think that censoring trans-related content is "protecting kids". > > So if you're in the US, please contact your Senators and ask them to oppose KOSA. > > - EFF has a handy web form > > - if you prefer the phone, you can call the US Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. The bill number is S. 1409. Your message doesn't have to be fancy: "KOSA won't keep kids safe" is enough if they're Republicans; if they're Democrats you can add "and it will harm LGBTQ+ teens". > > - or, https://resist.bot/ lets you contact your legislators by texting or using Messenger, Apple Messages, WhatsApp .
Totally agree that we need a good privacy bill -- and if the proposed ADPPA consumer privacy moves forward again this year, we'll need to get involved on that to push to strengthen it (because last year's version had huge loopholes, including some that left LGBTQ+ people's personal data at risk).
We’ve talked a lot about KOSA, the “Kids Online Safety Act” that has massive bipartisan support in Congress. The latest version was introduced with 26 Senators as sponsors or co-sponsors. We’ve exp…
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/1170157
> KOSA, the "Kids Online Safety Act", sounds good. Who doesn't want to keep kids safe? But as over 90 LGBTQ and human rights organizations said last year, KOSA would harm LGBTQ+ youth especially, and could be weaponized by Attorneys General to censor online resources and information for queer and trans youth, people seeking reproductive healthcare, and more. > > And it's not just a hypothetical concern! This article from a couple months ago includes a screenshot of a Heritage Foundation tweet talking about how they'll KOSA to attack trans-related content -- because after all, they think that censoring trans-related content is "protecting kids". > > So if you're in the US, please contact your Senators and ask them to oppose KOSA. > > - EFF has a handy web form > > - if you prefer the phone, you can call the US Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. The bill number is S. 1409. Your message doesn't have to be fancy: "KOSA won't keep kids safe" is enough if they're Republicans; if they're Democrats you can add "and it will harm LGBTQ+ teens". > > - or, https://resist.bot/ lets you contact your legislators by texting or using Messenger, Apple Messages, WhatsApp .
Yeah really. Think of the children!!!!
It's all true. WTF indeed. Here's a letter from over 90 LGBTQ and human rights organizations with more detail. EFF's article from in May, which is the one they linked to in the original article, has good info to.
We’ve talked a lot about KOSA, the “Kids Online Safety Act” that has massive bipartisan support in Congress. The latest version was introduced with 26 Senators as sponsors or co-sponsors. We’ve exp…
KOSA, the "Kids Online Safety Act", sounds good. Who doesn't want to keep kids safe? But as over 90 LGBTQ and human rights organizations said last year, KOSA would harm LGBTQ+ youth especially, and could be weaponized by Attorneys General to censor online resources and information for queer and trans youth, people seeking reproductive healthcare, and more.
And it's not just a hypothetical concern! This article from a couple months ago includes a screenshot of a Heritage Foundation tweet talking about how they'll KOSA to attack trans-related content -- because after all, they think that censoring trans-related content is "protecting kids".
So if you're in the US, please contact your Senators and ask them to oppose KOSA.
-
if you prefer the phone, you can call the US Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. The bill number is S. 1409. Your message doesn't have to be fancy: "KOSA won't keep kids safe" is enough if they're Republicans; if they're Democrats you can add "and it will harm LGBTQ+ teens".
-
or, https://resist.bot/ lets you contact your legislators by texting or using Messenger, Apple Messages, WhatsApp .
Next week, Congress plans to move a bill forward that is opposed by dozens of organizations, digital rights protectors, LGBTQ+ activists, and human rights defenders: the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA). As we’ve written before, KOSA would lead to censorship and privacy invasions for all social media.....
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/1163015
> EFF writes: > > >KOSA has laudable goals, but it also presents significant unintended consequences that threaten the privacy, safety, and access to information rights of young people and adults alike. Teenagers already understand that this sweeping legislation is more about censorship than safety. Now we just need to make sure Congress does, as well. > > Take action! If you're in the US, Use EFF's page to Tell Congress: KOSA Will Censor the Internet But Won't Help Kids > > And please help get the word out! Four ways to hep: > > 1. Cross-post this link to communities and magazines where it's on-topic > 2. Upvote and share the other links in !bad_internet_bills@lemmy.sdf.org > 3. If you're on Mastodon, check out the #KOSA hashtag and boost the posts you see there > 4. Tell your friends on other social networks as well.
Not exactly. These bills cut across party lines and there's a lot of desire to be able to pass something -- "think of the children!" So if anything the overall gridlock makes it more likely that these bills will pass. So the dynamics that led to stopping the bills last year was a combination of activists making enough noise, and privacy and digital rights groups pressing the case in meetings with legislators (as well as some grassroots groups with good relationships with their legislators). As a result, that Dem leadership decided not to move the bills to the floor, so the vote never happened.
The coalition is "demanding that Congress focus on passing badly needed comprehensive privacy legislation to actually protect us from the harms of Big Tech companies and data brokers."
Coverage of the week of action in Common Dreams, with quotes from @evangreer@mastodon.online of Fight for the Future.
If you want to help, here are four easy ways:
- If you live in the US, contact your legislators using Fight for the Future’s https://www.badinternetbills.com/
- Upvote and boost posts in !bad_internet_bills@lemmy.sdf.org -- and cross-post them to other communities and magazines where they're on-topic
- On Mastodon, boost posts on the #BadInternetBills and #KOSA hashtags
- Get the word out on other social networks too
It turns out that crossposting to Lemmy works better from Lemmy communities. So, a Lemmy community is useful. Since I had already crated the kbin magazine and there's no way to delete magazines (!), looks like we'll experiment to see whether or not having two of them makes sense. Here's the Lemmy community I created, I'm using it for now to cross-post from other communities so that there's a single place to go for everything. !bad_internet_bills@lemmy.sdf.org
The poorly drafted “Kids Online Safety Act” would make kids less safe, and would be weaponized to attack LGBTQ+ people and abortion rights Over 90 organizations have signed on to a letter led by the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and Fight for the Futu...
The "Kids Online Safety Act" (KOSA) is one of the Bad Internet Bills EFF is asking for help trying to stop. KOSA sounds like a good bill. Who doesn't want kids to be safe online? But KOSA wouldn't actually make kids safer -- and the way it's written would be especially harmful to LGBTQIA2S+ people.
As over 90 Human Rights and LGBTQ groups said in this letter the sent to Congress last year opposing KOSA:
"KOSA establishes a burdensome, vague “duty of care” to prevent harms to minors for a broad range of online services that are reasonably likely to be used by a person under the age of 17. While KOSA’s aims of preventing harassment, exploitation, and mental health trauma for minors are laudable, the legislation is unfortunately likely to have damaging unintended consequences for young people.
KOSA would require online services to “prevent” a set of harms to minors, which is effectively an instruction to employ broad content filtering to limit minors’ access to certain online content. Content filtering is notoriously imprecise; filtering used by schools and libraries in response to the Children’s Internet Protection Act has curtailed access to critical information such as sex education or resources for LGBTQ+ youth. Online services would face substantial pressure to over-moderate, including from state Attorneys General seeking to make political points about what kind of information is appropriate for young people.
At a time when books with LGBTQ+ themes are being banned from school libraries and people providing healthcare to trans children are being falsely accused of “grooming,” KOSA would cut off another vital avenue of access to information for vulnerable youth."
KOSA has.a markup session in the Senate next week, so now's a critical time to be telling Congress that we don't want this bad internet bill. So please help get the word out -- and if you're in the US, EFF's KOSA action page makes it easy to contact Congress
#BadInternetBills #KOSA #privacy
The bill may ultimately be included in a larger surveillance reform package aimed at reforming Section 702.
The House Judiciary Committee advanced the bill 30-0.
“This bill is the latest sign of bipartisan support in Congress to tackle the government’s warrantless purchase of American’s personal data, such as location information and internet records, in circumvention of the Fourth Amendment and statutory protections,” Caitriona Fitzgerald, deputy director of EPIC wrote in a statement.
“We’re seeing some incredible leadership on the hill and off the hill,” said Sean Vitka, policy counsel for Demand Progress. “The House has made it clear they want to close the data broker loophole, full stop,” he said.
Jon @lemmy.blahaj.zone Hi!!! I’m a strategist/entrepreneur/software engineer/activist, focusing on the intersection of justice, equity, and software engineering. I've been on the fediverse for a long time and am currently checking out /KBin. @jdp23@indieweb.social is my main account on