In many cases, district clerks may restrict the availability of sensitive information. However, this does not guarantee complete privacy.
To completely restrict access to divorce records, a formal court order must be issued to seal the case file. When a case is sealed, the public cannot access the documents, and no one, regardless of their status, can obtain copies of the records. Sealing a divorce case is typically reserved for special circumstances where privacy concerns are particularly high.
PS: a former friend of mine and former paralegal in TX for YEARS didn’t know this when she went searching a handful of years ago 🤨🤔😎
The bipartisan push to remove anonymity from the internet is ushering in an era of unprecedented mass surveillance and censorship.
The laws, framed as a way to crack down on harmful content and make the internet safer, would force social media companies to enact invasive identity verification measures in order to keep children from accessing online spaces.
The problem is that there’s no way to reliably verify someone’s age without verifying who they are. A platform cannot magically discern that a user is 16 without collecting identifying information, whether through government documents such as a passport, payment information like a credit card, or other identity-disclosing data. Whether that data is stored by the platform itself or outsourced to a vendor, the result is always the same: a user’s offline identity is forever linked with their online behavior.
Stripping anonymity from the internet would constitute one of the most sweeping rollbacks of civil rights in recent history. It would allow for unprecedented levels of mass surveillance and censorship, endangering the most marginalized members of society. Whistleblowers exposing corporate wrongdoing could be tracked and fired, government employees speaking out about illegal behavior or bad policies could face prosecution, and activists organizing protests could be identified and surveilled before ever setting foot on the street. […]
The push to eliminate online anonymity is ultimately a fight over whether the internet remains a space for dissent and free expression or further becomes a dystopian digital panopticon that operates as an arm of the surveillance state. A free society depends on the right to publish and consume information anonymously and to organize and speak privately. Age verification policies only bolster the power of Big Tech and give the government complete authority to surveil and censor online speech.
—
A must-read regardless of whether you’re from the US, if you haven’t been keeping up with this issue.
In relation to the new online child safety laws that a few states are trying to implement, I have some words and I know some people are going to be mad and or argue with me on this and I welcome them to do respectfully and with receipts. Don't expect me to change my mind that this is at least being done very poorly if not a bad idea in general.
1. Child safety that requires verifying the age of the child has been exploited before and it will happen again. This allows people to precisely target specific age ranges instead of being a hit or miss hoping to get a child. Look at YouTube kids from a few years ago.
Thousands of videos on YouTube look like versions of popular cartoons but contain disturbing and inappropriate content not suitable for chil
I know everybody says not use reddit or wikipedia as sources but we all know that's where we go when we need information so here's this too
2. Prosecution for the perpetrators. If lawmakers actually care about the children, they need to buckle down on prosecuting the people who target children with harmful content or actions. Right now, I am seeing very little consequence for this behavior. If we prosecuted the pedophiles we already know about, and worked on hunting down new ones when they show up, they would be afraid to do anything in the first place.
3. This is not only a threat on everybody's privacy, but I personally believe it is also a threat to education. These laws are primarily focused on the private home and I have heard nothing about school or library computers. With the general age range system, schools could still provide the age range and be fine, but if you have to show a government ID card, credit card, or some other form of personal identification to all operating systems, how are schools and libraries used by the general public supposed to function without lying to the system which could get them in legal trouble? Also, this could make it so the government can decide children (and adults too) are not fit for viewing potentially disturbing educational content like history, sex ed, and any other subject they don't want us learning about. They would be able to block the content from the devices themselves. And even if they can't just through these laws, it is only a matter of time till they come up with a way to do so anyway.
4. I find it very suspicious that this is all going on at the same time big tech companies are trying to build data centers (or if we're being accurate, personal information storage centers).
5. I am going to get biblical here, so if you don't care about that (even though it is insanely relevant), skip this section. The Bible directly mentions a time where you will not be able to buy or sell without "the mark of the beast" which indicates participation in the beasts system.
Revelation 13:16-17 ESV
[16] Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, [17] so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name.
https://bible.com/bible/59/rev.13.16-17.ESV
(you can also look this up on Bible gateway because I think that link will try to get you to download the Bible app that I use)
This age verification law would prevent us from accessing our bank accounts, among other important accounts from our phones and computers unless we have a form of ID and participate in the system (which I can pull many other verses from revelation that almost perfectly describe the US system and other places in the world, which is terrifying, but that's for another post.)
6. Parents have an obligation to monitor what their children are watching and doing on devices, who they're interacting with, etc. The problem is, way too many parents have gotten lazy about this or believe the protections in place are enough so they don't have to put in the effort. I know kids don't like being monitored, but it's for their own good. Helicoptering isn't necessary, but having honest and raw conversations with your child about their Internet usage and being a safe space for them to come to if they have any problems or questions is imperative.
7. All these laws about protecting the children are putting the spotlight on children and bring more attention to them, putting them in the faces of the people who want to harm them. I have seen a lot of laws about "protecting the children" that are at their core, a severe breach of privacy and bordering on blatant personal information collection and/or identity theft. Not to mention heading towards surveillance that would infringe on free speech rights and put us all in danger of being victims of government overreach.
8. We can fight back. We can contact lawmakers, do research, spread information and our opinions, and make a big noise about our thoughts on this.
I swear to god if the uk goes through with this whole getting rid of vpn bullshit there will be a such a curse upon them that even Shakespeare couldn’t dream up
