Unrolled: 5Rights Foundation (@5RightsFound) and their report “By what rights should we strip privacy and anonymity from People who are not Children?”

It is telling that your report is called

"But how do they know it is a Child"

…rather than:

"By what rights should we strip privacy and anonymity from People who are not Children?"

People – adults – are not an "it".

In 2019 Baroness Kidron herself criticised Government pushing to weaken Messenger End-to-End Encryption in the name of her child protection programme.

Yet somehow this "deanonymise everyone to "age-verify" protect children" project is morally acceptable?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/10/27/baroness-kidron-government-uses-shield-sympathy-child-sexual/

These are all facets of the same stone:

– requiring identity cards to access social media

– requiring age verification to access social media

– weakening end-to-end encryption

All means to "gatekeep", track, and surveil access to online speech.

These goals — to defeat the "end to end principle"& enable surveillance — have been a staple of all government policy, mostly everywhere, since the internet became popular.

But the end to end principle is the lifeblood of the Internet. We can't lose it without losing everything.

One of the original architects of the E2E Principle, David P Reed, wrote the attached essay in y2000 in which he predicted the Internet-Of-Things and ambient technologies which we only now are beginning to see.

All are antithetical to centralisation.

https://www.deepplum.com/dpr/locus/Papers/endofendtoend.html

I am comparing the April & Today's versions of @5RightsFound's "But how do they know it is a child?" paper; one of the most interesting elisions is this one: removal of:

"A Pathway to Diversifying the Market" [presumably for age verification]

Presumably it was too commercial?

If you would like to examine this apparent evidence of commercial interest in @5RightsFound's thinking, here's the March/April version of the paper:

I find it interesting that @5RightsFound consider children able to make "informed consent" by the mere knowledge that a "Third Party" may be involved in #AgeVerification for them — yet in another paper they deem "informed consent" challenging for *adults*

Interesting to see @5RightsFound respin the original and somewhat scary text:

"child is asked to upload a selfie"

…as the more mundane:

"complete a facial analysis scan".

…and also the removal of the critique of facial analysis on younger faces. Very business-centric.

Originally tweeted by Alec Muffett (@AlecMuffett) on 2021/10/14.

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *