3 ms·

>You'll get far more damaging views from viewing Facebook, a book written by an economist or the front page of a news outlet than anything blocked by one of the

• kick 7y ago
  This filter does not block sites encouraging self-harm. This filter blocks adult sites. My claim was that the filter only blocks things that are less harmful than what I listed. I don't think that's untrue, and stand by what I said. It is literally impossible to block all sites containing an idea via DNS filtering. It's substantially more plausible to block 'icky' sites. It's noted elsewhere in this thread that the filter doesn't block Facebook (which has many communities encouraging self-harm) nor reddit (which has countless communities that do so). The harms that the above poster cites (pro-ana & pro-suicide sites) are not and cannot be censored via use of a DNS filter.
  • woofcat 7y ago
    So you're saying since the solution isn't perfect, we should do away with it?
    • kick 7y ago
      The anti-solution isn't even attempting to be a solution. It's not that it isn't perfect. It's that it's not even resembling anything close to a solution: it's actively harmful to the goals that are apparently trying to be achieved.