5 ms·

> In other words, forcing users to prove who they are, or at least how old they are, before they can access the restricted content First we protect children. T

> In other words, forcing users to prove who they are, or at least how old they are, before they can access the restricted content First we protect children. Then we protect specific groups. Then they redefine who should be protected of what. In the end a few protect all the others from knowing things they shouldn't know. And knowledge is power, as always.

Nasrudith 5y ago
Really if you want to protect children don't make a goddamned dystopia for them to grow up in. We all know about the evil manipulators who favor that lie but frankly those stupid enough to believe bear moral agency as well.
- panta 5y ago
  Think of the children! …They could grow some critical thinking abilities otherwise…
- vkou 5y ago
  I would like to point out that a child not having access to the internet is not necessarily a 'goddamned dystopia', it's just how the world has been from the time of the first ape that stood up, to the Eternal September of ~1993.
  - cocoafleck 5y ago
    I agree, but keep in mind that children grow up in a society, and make friends in school. You are influencing their relationships by restricting their internet access.
    - true_religion 5y ago
      Sure, but the article is talking about government action. If every child in the UK grows up with age restricted internet then no ones relationships will be disadvantaged. The only thing that would be influenced is cross national relationships, and sitting in a separate country probably affects that way more than having equal access to the same webpages.
  - wtetzner 5y ago
    Sure, but children now will have to deal with the internet when they become adults. "Protecting" them from it just means they're less likely to be prepared for it when they do become adults.
gopher_space 5y ago
We absolutely need a media walled garden for children. There's no good reason to give them unfettered access to the internet right out of the chute. They can grow out of it at their own pace. The moralizing coming from all angles is weird, since everyone involved would probably consider themselves a problem-solver.
- jimbob45 5y ago
  That should be done by the parent, not the child. There are more than enough tools for a parent to police what their child sees online. The problem is that parents aren’t trusted to do their job by some and some want the government to step in and do as much parenting as possible. That’s not how parenting works though. The government doesn’t own your children and shouldn’t get to decide how they’re raised.
  - cissou 5y ago
    I hear your argument but would you apply the same to alcohol and cigarettes? Let parents make sure their kids get none of it until they’re of age? I think it cannot work that way and it’s OK for society as a whole to help with the parenting.
- alerighi 5y ago
  Just don't give your children internet access till they are old enough that they can be responsible enough to use it correctly? Why this is not an option? I got a PC that was all mine and an ADSL internet connection at 16 years old, before of that I used the family computer, but not really used the internet a lot since back in the day it was quite expensive, and when I did I was monitored by my parents. I got a smartphone that was capable of accessing the internet everywhere at 18, before of that only a phone that did phone calls and SMS. And still grow up fine and managed to get a good career in IT. There is no reason whatsoever for a child younger than 14 to use the internet on its own, without the surveillance of his parents. And there is even no reason for him to have a smartphone. If as a parents you are concerned about giving him a phone for emergencies, just give him a 10$ feature phone that can only do phone calls and SMS. It's as simple as that. Nowadays kids are always in front of a computer or a phone, they no longer go out to play, instead they spend their time on Tiktok or other stupid social media. We must change that, not the internet.

Nasrudith 5y ago

Really if you want to protect children don't make a goddamned dystopia for them to grow up in. We all know about the evil manipulators who favor that lie but frankly those stupid enough to believe bear moral agency as well.

panta 5y ago
Think of the children! …They could grow some critical thinking abilities otherwise…
vkou 5y ago
I would like to point out that a child not having access to the internet is not necessarily a 'goddamned dystopia', it's just how the world has been from the time of the first ape that stood up, to the Eternal September of ~1993.
- cocoafleck 5y ago
  I agree, but keep in mind that children grow up in a society, and make friends in school. You are influencing their relationships by restricting their internet access.
  - true_religion 5y ago
    Sure, but the article is talking about government action. If every child in the UK grows up with age restricted internet then no ones relationships will be disadvantaged. The only thing that would be influenced is cross national relationships, and sitting in a separate country probably affects that way more than having equal access to the same webpages.
- wtetzner 5y ago
  Sure, but children now will have to deal with the internet when they become adults. "Protecting" them from it just means they're less likely to be prepared for it when they do become adults.

gopher_space 5y ago

We absolutely need a media walled garden for children. There's no good reason to give them unfettered access to the internet right out of the chute. They can grow out of it at their own pace. The moralizing coming from all angles is weird, since everyone involved would probably consider themselves a problem-solver.

jimbob45 5y ago
That should be done by the parent, not the child. There are more than enough tools for a parent to police what their child sees online. The problem is that parents aren’t trusted to do their job by some and some want the government to step in and do as much parenting as possible. That’s not how parenting works though. The government doesn’t own your children and shouldn’t get to decide how they’re raised.
- cissou 5y ago
  I hear your argument but would you apply the same to alcohol and cigarettes? Let parents make sure their kids get none of it until they’re of age? I think it cannot work that way and it’s OK for society as a whole to help with the parenting.
alerighi 5y ago
Just don't give your children internet access till they are old enough that they can be responsible enough to use it correctly? Why this is not an option? I got a PC that was all mine and an ADSL internet connection at 16 years old, before of that I used the family computer, but not really used the internet a lot since back in the day it was quite expensive, and when I did I was monitored by my parents. I got a smartphone that was capable of accessing the internet everywhere at 18, before of that only a phone that did phone calls and SMS. And still grow up fine and managed to get a good career in IT. There is no reason whatsoever for a child younger than 14 to use the internet on its own, without the surveillance of his parents. And there is even no reason for him to have a smartphone. If as a parents you are concerned about giving him a phone for emergencies, just give him a 10$ feature phone that can only do phone calls and SMS. It's as simple as that. Nowadays kids are always in front of a computer or a phone, they no longer go out to play, instead they spend their time on Tiktok or other stupid social media. We must change that, not the internet.