4 ms·

I would do it the other way around: Create a standard header with a "Parental Advisory" PG kind of label. Then let the consumer decide what to do with it. The

I would do it the other way around: Create a standard header with a "Parental Advisory" PG kind of label. Then let the consumer decide what to do with it. The web is "content", and it is up to the parents to decide how to police their kid's content consumption (same as with music, video, etc). Then we can start talking about Operating Systems, Browsers or Access points features allowing parents to block pages with specific PG ratings.

chlodwig 4y ago
Hmm, that would work too. Under this kind of system, the laws protecting children wouldn't ban serving possibly-adult content, or require age checking, but would mandate that you must label certain content with the correct and appropriate age label.
- mjevans 4y ago
  No. Lack of label should be equated to UNRATED, just like for movies. By _default_ the Internet should be for Adults who have their own right to choose what they see or don't see. Let the OS / browser / etc WHITELIST things based on a claim something is safe for children, or rated in an academic context (E.G. Wikipedia / medical / etc).
  - chlodwig 4y ago
    Right. I'm just saying that there would have to be laws punishing providers who falsely label porn as PG-13 or something. Or punishing providers who label their open, unmoderated forums as PG when in fact it has lots of obscene content on it.
autoexec 4y ago
That's a good solution for data that is being sent to users, but doesn't help when it comes to data being collected by sites and services.
- kube-system 4y ago
  Require sites that collect data to announce an adults-only rating of sorts?
  - autoexec 4y ago
    What would be left? They wouldn't be able to access social media or google. That might not sound so bad to me, but I doubt most children or parents would be happy with that. Not if they want some way for kids to have meaningful access to the internet and also prevent companies from collecting their kid's data. Not that California's law would even do that, but it's how they're selling it to people.
    - chlodwig 4y ago
      Google is wealthy enough to create a G-rated version of its service that doesn't have the privacy issues. Or a startup could tackle the problem.
    - kube-system 4y ago
      Every site that complies with COPPA today.
wpietri 4y ago
Ooh, that's good. I'd be most helpful if there were standardized content warnings so that parents could select what they're ok with. E.g., here's one list: https://thetvdb.com/taxonomy/movie/22 https://thetvdb.com/taxonomy/movie/22 Also interesting is this site: https://www.doesthedogdie.com/ https://www.doesthedogdie.com/ Maybe this could go beyond parents. There are whole classes of image that I'd like to have to choose to see. E.g., if I'm eating breakfast and scrolling through Twitter, I don't need to see, say, mangled flesh in an accident photo. If there were standardized content tags, then parents could tell browsers to block outright and adults could make it click-to-view.
easrng 4y ago
That would also likely be better from a fingerprinting perspective.

chlodwig 4y ago

Hmm, that would work too. Under this kind of system, the laws protecting children wouldn't ban serving possibly-adult content, or require age checking, but would mandate that you must label certain content with the correct and appropriate age label.

mjevans 4y ago
No. Lack of label should be equated to UNRATED, just like for movies. By _default_ the Internet should be for Adults who have their own right to choose what they see or don't see. Let the OS / browser / etc WHITELIST things based on a claim something is safe for children, or rated in an academic context (E.G. Wikipedia / medical / etc).
- chlodwig 4y ago
  Right. I'm just saying that there would have to be laws punishing providers who falsely label porn as PG-13 or something. Or punishing providers who label their open, unmoderated forums as PG when in fact it has lots of obscene content on it.

autoexec 4y ago

That's a good solution for data that is being sent to users, but doesn't help when it comes to data being collected by sites and services.

kube-system 4y ago
Require sites that collect data to announce an adults-only rating of sorts?
- autoexec 4y ago
  What would be left? They wouldn't be able to access social media or google. That might not sound so bad to me, but I doubt most children or parents would be happy with that. Not if they want some way for kids to have meaningful access to the internet and also prevent companies from collecting their kid's data. Not that California's law would even do that, but it's how they're selling it to people.
  - chlodwig 4y ago
    Google is wealthy enough to create a G-rated version of its service that doesn't have the privacy issues. Or a startup could tackle the problem.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Every site that complies with COPPA today.

wpietri 4y ago

Ooh, that's good. I'd be most helpful if there were standardized content warnings so that parents could select what they're ok with. E.g., here's one list: https://thetvdb.com/taxonomy/movie/22 https://thetvdb.com/taxonomy/movie/22 Also interesting is this site: https://www.doesthedogdie.com/ https://www.doesthedogdie.com/ Maybe this could go beyond parents. There are whole classes of image that I'd like to have to choose to see. E.g., if I'm eating breakfast and scrolling through Twitter, I don't need to see, say, mangled flesh in an accident photo. If there were standardized content tags, then parents could tell browsers to block outright and adults could make it click-to-view.

easrng 4y ago

That would also likely be better from a fingerprinting perspective.