Fuck Me in the Hell

So in the last twenty four hours, I've seen a lot of stuff about Lindsey Graham, a possible update on Mitch McConnell where he provides proof of life but is no longer capable of serving in the Senate, and a few other things of that nature. I am also under the impression that tomorrow, on Monday the 13th of July, the Senate returns after being in either recess, or something equivalent to it but formally different somehow.

What this says to me is that tomorrow is probably a good time to call your Senators and voice concerns and protests about the KIDS Act package and the legislation that went into it, including not only KOSA but the EARN IT Act and SCREEN Act. I believe the latter two were heavily influenced by Graham, and he may have even introduced one or both; we've been fighting this kind of legislation for a while and a lot has happened in that time span, so I cannot remember precisely and my notes are in considerable disarray. Whatever the case, he is no longer in a position to advocate, lobby, promote, or favor-trade for it. I do not at this time have access to information on when the Senate will be taking up any specific legislation, but the loss of one GOP Senator (possibly two) shaves their already thin majority down even further until interim appointments can be made / special elections held. Majority Leader Thune is almost certainly having to recalculate a lot of political math right now, and he was already trying to thread the needle between the president's obsession with the SAVE Act and the backlash from voters and polling.

Remember to frame your position according to what resonates with the personal and party politics of the Senator you are calling. Statistically speaking, Democrats are more likely to listen to concerns about Trump using this legislation to silence free speech, which he does more than enough of already. Republicans on the other hand are more likely to hear concerns about the economy and national security grounds, and with the whole Iran and Strait of Hormuz thing going on right now, both are VERY topical. However these are general trends, and some topics will be much more and less important to individual elected officials, so figuring out what those are in advance is a good idea.

chances are I can't. my body is that of a disabled Asian woman.

the facial markers of childhood on a white person- prominent monolid eyes, round faces without prominent cheekbones, clear, smooth skin devoid of wrinkles, lack of facial hair- are traits that many adults of Asian descent, many in their fifties and sixties even, have to an extent that several of my (adult, mind you) relatives and friends have been declared to be in their teens, or even to be preteens or 8-year-olds, by an algorithm that associated those features with childhood rather than ethnicity and lineage.

I can usually figure out how to look directly at a camera, if I try hard enough. but from what I've seen of Roblox's face verification process, it also needs you to move your eyes slowly from left to right so it can determine you're using live footage of a real person.

simple, right? wrong. I can't do that. I can kind of move my eyes a short distance(and it always hurts like hell, especially when I do it consciously), and I can change what part of my vision I'm paying attention to, but otherwise my only way to change what I'm looking at is to turn my entire head. and it clearly doesn't accept head-turning as "looking from left to right".

I don't have any other facial differences that might mess with the algorithm recognizing my face as a face- and that's a related problem that's already been documented by numerous people and organizations like Face Equality International.

having a credit card is not proof of adulthood

not all adults have credit cards

I do not trust an algorithm trained on white people not to decide all Asians and Blacks are 12-year-olds

dude if the government can be hacked Discord('s shady third party data processor) definitely can be as well

I don't trust a random corporation with data that sensitive

“The New Zealand government has officially denied any plans to restrict or ban VPN apps as part of its upcoming under-16 social media ban, putting an end to intense speculation and a rapid backlash from digital privacy advocates.”

“The saga began following a report from The Post that Education Minister Erica Stanford said the government was considering any restrictions on VPNs as part of the country's under-16 social media ban.

Because a Virtual Private Network (VPN) can easily spoof a user's location and bypass local network blocks, the technology was viewed by some officials as a potential roadblock to enforcing age verification mandates.”

This notion of banning VPNs sparked massive backlash

“Coalition partners quickly distanced themselves from the idea, with the ACT party reportedly marking any anti-encryption measures as a strict red line”

“The Free Speech Union also lambasted the concept.

Critics warned that a VPN ban would undermine digital free speech and put New Zealand in the same category as oppressive regimes that strictly control internet access.”

after the backlash

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon put the rumors firmly to rest. "I can reject that outright. There's no plan to ban VPNs at all," Luxon said. "I don't know where that reporting or where that story came from, but I can reassure you that's not the case".

source

Users have been noticing that Bluesky has been asking them to verify their age

This isn’t new for some, but recently it started happening with users in Texas (or Bluesky believes are in Texas)

“A large blue button instructed users to verify their ages.

Those who didn't want to were directed to either log out or delete their account entirely.

Many Bluesky users were unable to access the age verification screen and were instead given an error.

But users who did found that their options to verify their ages included putting in the last four digits of their Social Security Number, inputting a credit card number or having their driver's license scanned.”

According to a spokesperson at Blusky, a new Texas law, the “App Store Accountability Act” has been allowed to be enforced

Blusky safety said

“Texas passed an age assurance law that requires Bluesky to verify the age of users. This law was paused by a judge and then unpaused by an appeals court, so we are preparing to comply. If you saw an age assurance notice today”

Though this law is still being fought and might be taken down in the future

Many users are not excited because they don’t trust companies keeping their IDs or sensitive information

wanna get past the block on websites or even the app itself (depending on the method)

... Have you considered i am stupid?

Like, okay self depressing shit aside.

I should not, as a fucking adult, have to give up my ssn number to a fucking site to see shit.

I shouldn't have to risk my livelyhood because visa and mastercard are scared of pussy and dicks.

I should not, have to share my movements at all times to anyone. This is protecting no one, this is in fact dangerorous for everyone involved in having data leeks. Theres no kids being protected there's just our personal info being traded and sold like playing cards.

And in places where we have these age verification bans in effect, they ALSO want to ban VPN's, the thing yall tote as THE solution.

Not to mention, there's learning about vpns you have to do, the research, are you going to pay another fucking bill to access the internet that you already probably pay for on say a phone where you pay yet another bill for-

And what point is it enough!?!?

I NEVER AGREED TO THIS BULLSHIT AND NEITHER DID THE REST OF US.

And yet, AND YET. IF YOU WANTED TO HELP KIDS, WE'D BE WORKIN ON THE EPSTEIN FILES.

There is no saving children, only turning you into a product to be exploited.

and both of these are related to the draconian bills like KOSA that would seek to ban kids from the platforms built by kids from my generation

Do you remember a phrase that went "SOPA means LOSER in Swedish!"?

That's what the Minecraft splash text said in 2012. With Mojang behind one of the biggest pushes, I'd say we were pretty organized. I don't know if you remember, but back then when SOPA was a bad Internet bill, the citizens of the Internet came together and kicked its ass. Excellent. Peace of mind.

Sadly, 2025 and onward is not as fortunate. Plenty of shitty bills have already passed - or at least gone further than we ever would have expected or liked - and The UK has been terrifyingly ruined. I never want to go to England for that. Australia already got screwed up, and now New Zealand where I live is being threatened.

So, what's happening now? We need to kick KOSA's ass the same way we kicked SOPA's ass, and, frankly, the same way we kicked TPPA's ass.

I usually don't get into politics because A, I'm rarely fully informed, B, doesn't affect where I live so the little info gathered gets later, and C, I don't get most of things, I'm so dumb with this type of stuff. They use fancy words that I don't understand.

There are 40 beautiful people following this empty blog (I love you guys), and even if it's not much compared to the people I follow, that's 40 informed people that will spread the word, and that'll be even more people informed.

So Europe's dying to get into your messages, what you send and talk about, and even want to associate your socials with passport and identification so they're fucking sure it was you who said something not especially harmful but that people with different opinions will drown when reading it. No matter if you're just chilling with a friend or... I dunno, criticising a government's poor choices, which honestly, who hasn't?

The worst thing is that it's not the first time they tried it, it's the second. You think Europe's so good and democratic, well this is a step closer to north Korea or China. And yes, that's a bit of an exaggeration and my paranoia talking at 2:25 am, but fuck, reading your fucking messages without you wanting to. What's next? I forgot if it was in china or North Korea, but if you texted something in a 'private' conversation that their government would not like, your message was not sent or it was deleted. Not on social media. In their own fucking version of WhatsApp.

They also want to put cameras in your cars. What's next? In my house? In my bathroom? Do I have to shove a mic up my ass so you can hear me complaining how much I hate what I'm realising?

And they did it on summer vacation, between the football, who is gonna pay attention to have your discord, WhatsApp, Telegram and other socials you can talk through completely watched and controlled when today was Spain versus Belgium?

I'm not saying they're the only people with powers that announce things like this when there's a big distraction. They told you, it was YOUR problem you didn't know, that you didn't go to the streets and stand up for the basic privilege of privacy. At least my government does that too, dunno about yours.

I don't know if this got approved, I'm not religious but if you are, pray for it to not be approved.

I got all this info from a video on YouTube (down below, when I finish rambling, most I'm saying it's basically what she said) and my friends mentioned it in my group chat but only barely.

And I'm pissed because I'm European, this affects me, and for me, it's not the first time.

A few months ago, in my country, telegram informed that minors under 16 would lose the right to be in social media AND YES SOCIAL MEDIA IS WHATSAPP, YOUTUBE, PINTEREST, THIS BEAUTIFUL APP AND ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN PUT SOMETHING AND HAVE AT LEAST ONE PEOPLE TO REACT (my friends told me cuz I don't have telegram so I didn't receive it). Few months later, my government wanted to implement a thingy that detected 'hate speeches' and reported them or something. But how can you train an AI to stop hate when the person who is making it runs more a circus and a reality show than a fucking government? When you also impulse hate speeches towards your rivals? It's only natural they bite back. What can my government consider a hate speech? Saying 'oohh I hate how bad the government is handling my country' or some shit is considered a hate speech? It's only when it's from the rival? Because they seem to think so. But if it's the people talking, then what are you doing? Silencing them?

I also don't know if any of the two in my country got approved. Or if they are not the only ones.

Anyway sorry for the ramble, I'm just so pissed at how people with more money and power than us think they can control us while we just stand fucking helpless.

I put colours because that's a lot of text and I don't want to tire your sight with the same colour.

Please stay informed and save.

Love you guys, take care 😘

“Today, the European Parliament allowed the suspicionless mass scanning of private communications (“Chat Control 1.0”) to pass, a measure it had rejected twice in March.

Although a majority of voting Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) actually opposed the regulation (314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions), the motion to reject it failed to secure the required absolute majority of 361 votes.

As a result, mass scanning is now permitted again until 2028.”

“A symbolic exemption was adopted for encrypted communications—though in practice, service providers do not scan these anyway.

Furthermore, while a majority of voting MEPs wanted to restrict the scanning of private communications strictly to suspects identified by the judiciary (322 to 255 votes), this amendment likewise fell short of the required absolute majority.”

Dr. Patrick Breyer, civil rights activist and former Member of the European Parliament (MEP), warns of the consequences: “The fact that Chat Control is moving forward against the will of the majority of voting MEPs is a farce and damages democracy. Our children are the real losers in this undemocratic process.

The passage of a genuine, permanent child protection regulation is now in serious jeopardy. The Council will never agree to a desperately needed paradigm shift as long as they can simply stick to the old approach of suspicionless scanning at the whim of the tech industry.”

Despite the legislative defeat, Breyer remains defiant regarding the upcoming negotiations: “Today’s vote on the interim regulation was a setback, but the political battle over the permanent ‘Chat Control 2.0’ is just getting started.

The resistance we saw in Parliament today was so strong that finding a majority for permanent, suspicionless mass scanning in future negotiations is a complete pipe dream.”

what’s next?

“The interim regulation passed today will remain in effect until 2028, or until an agreement on a permanent regulation is reached. Negotiations for the permanent law will resume in September.

The core dispute between the EU Parliament, member state governments, and the EU Commission remains the scanning of private chats: should it be indiscriminate, or targeted at criminal suspects?”

“Talk of averting a “protection gap” is therefore highly misleading.

The most effective law enforcement tools—court-ordered wiretaps, user reports, and the scanning of public platforms and cloud storage—were never at risk and remain fully intact.

The only practice that was temporarily banned since April was the indiscriminate, warrantless searching of private, unencrypted messages of innocent people on a handful of US platforms.”

talks over permanent

“In parallel, negotiations are ongoing for a permanent regulation to protect children from sexualized online violence (the “CSAM Regulation” or “Chat Control 2.0”)

In these talks, the EU Parliament is pushing for a paradigm shift in how we approach online child safety, demanding:

Mandatory, targeted detection orders against actual criminal suspects, rather than blanket mass scanning left to the tech industry’s discretion.

An EU Child Protection Centre tasked with the systematic removal of known abuse material from the public internet.

Strict security standards for messaging apps (“Security by Design”) to prevent cyber grooming.”

This permanent legislation has stalled because EU member states insist on maintaining the outdated approach of voluntary, suspicionless scanning of private communications.

Critics warn that repeatedly extending the interim rules removes the political pressure needed to reach a viable, permanent agreement.

Ultimately, clinging to the status quo threatens to derail real progress on child protection.

Patrick Breyer sums up the problem: “As long as EU governments can use procedural loopholes to continually extend their comfortable status quo of voluntary, indiscriminate mass scanning, they have zero incentive to engage with the Parliament’s targeted, legally sound, and far more effective child protection strategy.

“The Voices of Survivors: “We need privacy to bring abusers to justice”

Survivors of sexual violence explicitly emphasize that untargeted Chat Control did not help victims: