Josh Withrow

7.1K posts

Josh Withrow

Josh Withrow

@JGWithrow

R Street Institute Fellow, Tech & Innovation. Opinions and puns are my own. @[email protected]

Washington, DC Katılım Nisan 2011
600 Takip Edilen1.2K Takipçiler
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Joe Kane
Joe Kane@thejoekane·
This is also a good chance for @tedcruz to end "the public interest standard and its wretched offspring like the "'news distortion rule'"
Rebecca Kern@rebeccamkern

New - @SenTedCruz says he will soon be introducing the “Jawbone Act” to stop government agencies from bullying platforms into silencing the American people, during @SenateCommerce_ hearing on history of Section 230.

English
1
3
9
692
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Logan Kolas
Logan Kolas@Logan_Kolas·
As Senate Commerce begins its hearing on Section 230 more than 30 years after it passed, Congress should keep consumers at the heart of the discussion. Despite widespread public ridicule, Section 230 is still pro-consumer. Here's to 30 more years of lower prices, more access, better quality content, and robust consumer choice.
English
2
12
22
879
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Jimmy Wales
Jimmy Wales@jimmy_wales·
Today is the 9th anniversary of Google's Family Link feature. I encourage my fellow advocates for a safer internet for children to promote it and talk about it. And learn why your advocacy for highly intrusive digital identification and your campaigns against security features like VPNs are so toxic for internet safety.
English
8
29
80
6.3K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Chris Marchese
Chris Marchese@ChrisMarchese9·
Anonymous access to lawful information is a First Amendment right — McIntyre, Talley, Watchtower. The problem isn’t just what happens to your ID. It’s that millions of adults self-censor and avoid lawful content rather than risk their security or privacy. Chilling effects on constitutionally protected speech aren’t cured by elegant cryptography
Tim Estes@twestes

I’m tired of all of this bull and scare tactics on Age Verification. I’ve been in AI for 25 years, held above TS clearances, mentored and worked with numerous companies in security and compliance. I’ve worked with non profits and groups rooting out horrific abuse of children and seen where ‘privacy’ was invoked to keep law enforcement from getting access to the phones of terrorists AFTER they had killed people. Here’s the truth: Modern tech approaches don’t require any persistence at all of someone’s ID. It’s just a lie. Zero Knowledge Proof approaches makes the risk basically zero. Those that say it isn’t enough actually have to make a case that any presentation of proof is a burden (so they are basically anarchists). And moreover - nearly all of these companies know who you are and what you like and do more than your family does. It’s their business model. It’s wrong and we should have had a real privacy law a long time ago. They don’t need laws to know more about you.They just don’t want liability when they have kids illegally on their platforms and hide behind the ‘actual knowledge standard’ to avoid paying for the harms they occur. They want to shape the AV laws now that the public is waking up to the truth around the world. They want to shape the new laws and put bad ones in place of good new ones so they can delay the reckoning for longer. It has nothing to do with knowing more about you. Zero. Everyone arguing otherwise is either paid off, a useful idiot, or a degenerate anarchist that thinks that defiling childhood is part of ‘freedom.’ They don’t realize that freedom to survive requires a moral society - that respects human dignity. Without that there will be no respect for privacy or protection against exploitation. PS- Whats really hilarious is it’s totally intellectually incoherent to be for the SAVE Act or any form of voterID and against modern AV tech.

English
5
139
590
16.8K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Berin Szóka
Berin Szóka@BerinSzoka·
California's Age Appropriate Design requires platforms to operate in the “best interests of children.” The Ninth Circuit just ruled that this affects speech and is too vague: it cannot provide “sufficient notice of what is proscribed,” as required by Fox Television v. FCC (2012)
Mike Swift@Swiftstories

Breaking on @mlexclusive : A significant loss for #socialmedia and gaming platforms like @Roblox as the Ninth Circuit allows much of California's Age-Appropriate Design Code to move forward.

English
7
16
49
2.9K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Andy Jung
Andy Jung@AndyJungTech·
New piece from me on laws banning minors from using chatbots. Minors have a First Amendment right to receive information, and the vast majority of chatbot outputs are protected speech. Full-on bans go beyond protecting minors from obscene material—they're not narrowly tailored.
Andy Jung tweet media
English
1
7
22
1.2K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
NetChoice
NetChoice@NetChoice·
🚨🚨 Court Rules Against California’s Trojan Horse for Censorship for FOURTH Time PASADENA, Calif.—Today, NetChoice secured a major victory from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which agreed that a majority of California’s Online Speech Code was unconstitutional. Of the six substantive provisions NetChoice challenged, five remain enjoined after today’s decision, and the remaining provision is hanging by a thread. NetChoice will continue to vociferously make our case that the entire law, which is a Trojan Horse for mass digital censorship in America, is unconstitutional and must be stopped. “Today’s decision is a huge victory for free speech and essentially a death knell for California’s online speech code. California cannot mandate vague and onerous changes to how speech is disseminated online. The Ninth Circuit was clear: on the substance, NetChoice is likely to prevail,” said @Paul_Taske, Co-Director of the NetChoice Litigation Center. Taske continued: “This law is hanging on by a thread. To the extent there is some additional work to do in the district court, we look forward to making a full showing and striking down California’s Speech Code permanently.”
NetChoice tweet media
English
40
239
726
69.8K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Lara Brown
Lara Brown@lara_e_brown·
Should we ban social media? Are age restrictions for children worth forcing every adult to attach government ID to their online presence. In @spectator I argue that we are gripped by a moral panic which demonises social media and ignores other factors making childhood worse.
Lara Brown tweet media
English
20
83
217
12.8K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Edward Longe, Ph.D
Edward Longe, Ph.D@EdwardLonge·
“I’ve been called a Luddite, anti-innovation.” Senator, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck… 🦆 @BernieSanders @SenSanders
Edward Longe, Ph.D tweet media
English
2
8
28
2.2K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Preston Byrne
Preston Byrne@prestonjbyrne·
Nonsense. Look at the UK's first targets: 4chan doesn't use an addiction algo. Gab displays posts on the feed in chronological order. The two other targets were discussion boards. The Online Safety Act is about one thing: censorship.
LBC@LBC

'They don't care if it's porn, self-harm, suicide... As long as they keep you online.' Tech companies' resistance to regulation 'isn't about free speech', Baroness Kidron argues, it's about keeping you addicted.

English
34
645
4.5K
81.2K
Josh Withrow
Josh Withrow@JGWithrow·
Judge striking down Texas' ASAA: "The Act is akin to a law that would require every bookstore to identify the age of every customer at the door and, for minors, require parental consent before the child or teen could enter and again when they try to purchase a book."
Energy and Commerce Committee@HouseCommerce

App stores should be held to the same standards as their brick-and-mortar counterparts. Age verification measures for app purchases are common sense solutions to give parents oversight of their kids' online experience. The App Store Accountability Act does just that, helping put parents in charge and protecting kids' privacy online.

English
14
527
2K
41K
Josh Withrow
Josh Withrow@JGWithrow·
"...the KIDS Act and ASAA both clearly require age verification for content that is not obscene to minors—and both bills clearly do burden the First Amendment speech of adults to access entirely lawful speech anonymously." ~ @BerinSzoka techdirt.com/2026/03/09/con…
English
1
9
19
1.4K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Iain Murray
Iain Murray@ismurray·
It's a very happy 250th birthday to the Wealth of Nations, and also a happy 42nd birthday to @ceidotorg. In my latest paper, I try to explain how Adam Smith and other economic greats continue to inspire supporters of free markets - and have the answers to their critics 1/2
English
1
8
16
1.9K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Brent Skorup
Brent Skorup@bskorup·
Tom Hazlett in the WSJ: "New media has been a godsend for free speech. But there is no good reason to cling to bad ideas from the Coolidge era for traditional programming. 'Equal time' requirements tax free speech and turn debates into media circuses." wsj.com/opinion/the-eq…
English
0
3
3
198
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Max Gulker
Max Gulker@maxg_econ·
Kids’ safety is a priority we deem so absolute that at times we sacrifice other near-absolutes, like privacy and free speech. The App Store Accountability Act doesn’t force such tradeoffs, however, because it doesn’t actually make kids safer. 🔗👇
English
3
19
58
5.7K
Josh Withrow retweetledi
Ari Cohn
Ari Cohn@AriCohn·
The First Amendment does not recognize any such thing as "internet adulthood" when it comes to the expression that people can access. Period.
Ari Cohn tweet media
English
17
84
463
28.1K