4 ms·

Maybe they should jail the parents instead? Your kids, your responsibility.

by alar44 4y ago

LinuxBender 4y ago
That may be a bit harsh but is not far from what I have been suggesting [1][2] The liability for protecting kids must be on the parents and there are simple technical ways to solve this. In my opinion laws should just require websites to add RTA headers and the most popular ways small children access content must be required to once again read these headers and integrate with parental controls. I say once again because some browsers used to implement this ages ago. If browser devs are opposed to this then it could be done by writing an add-on. [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34260167#34262400 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34260167#34262400 [2] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34352923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34352923
- edgyquant 4y ago
  If one or two children are effected it’s the parents fault, when all children are statistically impacted in a negative way it’s systemic and is the fault of organization.
  - LinuxBender 4y ago
    This may be the case but I would rather not spend tax money playing whack-a-mole with businesses thus artificially creating new revenue models for lawyers. I would rather just put a technical solution in place that empowers good parents to have some control over their own devices and let them decide when their small children are somewhat psychologically armed to handle the internet. RTA headers do not require integration with any third party sites and does not add tracking or additional identification. Sunak and others have been pushing for rules that would require sites to use third party identification sites. This is a non-starter for me personally. It is very obvious to me someones pockets are getting lined by people interested in adding more tracking to the internet. I see this as the UK trying to extend its CCTV system to the rest of the world but perhaps I am a bit skeptical after watching the behavior of governments for many decades. It is also a bit curious that US politicians have also been pushing for this at the same time. These recent events really smell like a startup trying to get funded by multiple governments. Investors love government contracts because they are usually multi-year and get written into policy. In terms of disciplining parents that neglect their children there is already a system in place for this. The first time should be an infraction that requires the parent to do an online training course. Perhaps under extreme circumstances a misdemeanor and at some point social services step in just like in any other repeat neglect case. In reality this should not affect most parents. There should not be any jail involved unless the parents are intentionally putting the children in harms way such as encouraging the kids to pose nude for strangers and inviting said strangers over.
  - maxk42 4y ago
    Or it's a societal problem. Don't discount the ability of society at large to make dumb mistakes. Is it really Coca Cola's fault your kids are fat?
    - jodrellblank 4y ago
      > "Is it really Coca Cola's fault your kids are fat?" Yes. https://twitter.com/calleymeans/status/1609929026889711617 https://twitter.com/calleymeans/status/1609929026889711617 "Early in my career, I consulted for Coke to ensure sugar taxes failed and soda was included in food stamp funding. I say Coke's policies are evil because I saw inside the room. The first step in playbook was paying the NAACP + other civil rights groups to call opponents racist[...]The conversations inside these rooms was depressingly transactional: "We (Coke) will give you money. You need to paint opponents of us as racist."" "watched as the FDA funneled money to professors at leading universities - as well as think tanks on the left and right - to create studies showing soda taxes hurt the poor. They also paid for studies that say drinking soda DIDN'T cause obesity."
      - LinuxBender 4y ago
        In my opinion corporations that lobby/bribe to harm people should be handled differently than the internet censorship issue. In those cases I believe that such entities and all related parties should be considered a domestic terrorist and anyone that lobbied for them or any politician that took said bribes should be branded as aiding and abetting a domestic terrorist. There are already laws on the books for handling such people. If the offending company is international then it is no longer just domestic. Why domestic terrorist? Easy, they are intentionally harming people for profit. The mortality impact is very slow but there is a myriad of scientific data to prove the harm. Just type-2 diabetes alone may bankrupt most first world countries [1]. [1] - https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2017/p0718-diabetes-report.html https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2017/p0718-diabetes-repor... (2017) [this has only gotten worse]
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      Coca Cola's corporate propaganda is ubiquitous. They certainly are not innocent.
edgyquant 4y ago
The companies build services designed to addict children and make bullying ten times easier. Fuck your politics, this is evil shit and these companies need held accountable. We don’t allow kids to purchase alcohol and blame the parents when they get alcohol poisoning. We make sure companies don’t target alcohol at kids.
hospadar 4y ago
Maybe let's not jail anyone? Putting kid's parents in jail is a surefire way to make sure that kids life becomes a stressful, scary, unsupported nightmare. Parents who let their kids use social media (i.e. almost every parent whose family has access to technology) are a lot better than no parents at all.

Maybe they should jail the parents instead? Your kids, your responsibility.

by alar44 4y ago

Maybe they should jail the parents instead? Your kids, your responsibility.

That may be a bit harsh but is not far from what I have been suggesting [1][2] The liability for protecting kids must be on the parents and there are simple technical ways to solve this. In my opinion laws should just require websites to add RTA headers and the most popular ways small children access content must be required to once again read these headers and integrate with parental controls. I say once again because some browsers used to implement this ages ago. If browser devs are opposed to this then it could be done by writing an add-on. [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34260167#34262400 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34260167#34262400 [2] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34352923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34352923

edgyquant 4y ago
If one or two children are effected it’s the parents fault, when all children are statistically impacted in a negative way it’s systemic and is the fault of organization.
- LinuxBender 4y ago
  This may be the case but I would rather not spend tax money playing whack-a-mole with businesses thus artificially creating new revenue models for lawyers. I would rather just put a technical solution in place that empowers good parents to have some control over their own devices and let them decide when their small children are somewhat psychologically armed to handle the internet. RTA headers do not require integration with any third party sites and does not add tracking or additional identification. Sunak and others have been pushing for rules that would require sites to use third party identification sites. This is a non-starter for me personally. It is very obvious to me someones pockets are getting lined by people interested in adding more tracking to the internet. I see this as the UK trying to extend its CCTV system to the rest of the world but perhaps I am a bit skeptical after watching the behavior of governments for many decades. It is also a bit curious that US politicians have also been pushing for this at the same time. These recent events really smell like a startup trying to get funded by multiple governments. Investors love government contracts because they are usually multi-year and get written into policy. In terms of disciplining parents that neglect their children there is already a system in place for this. The first time should be an infraction that requires the parent to do an online training course. Perhaps under extreme circumstances a misdemeanor and at some point social services step in just like in any other repeat neglect case. In reality this should not affect most parents. There should not be any jail involved unless the parents are intentionally putting the children in harms way such as encouraging the kids to pose nude for strangers and inviting said strangers over.
- maxk42 4y ago
  Or it's a societal problem. Don't discount the ability of society at large to make dumb mistakes. Is it really Coca Cola's fault your kids are fat?
  - jodrellblank 4y ago
    > "Is it really Coca Cola's fault your kids are fat?" Yes. https://twitter.com/calleymeans/status/1609929026889711617 https://twitter.com/calleymeans/status/1609929026889711617 "Early in my career, I consulted for Coke to ensure sugar taxes failed and soda was included in food stamp funding. I say Coke's policies are evil because I saw inside the room. The first step in playbook was paying the NAACP + other civil rights groups to call opponents racist[...]The conversations inside these rooms was depressingly transactional: "We (Coke) will give you money. You need to paint opponents of us as racist."" "watched as the FDA funneled money to professors at leading universities - as well as think tanks on the left and right - to create studies showing soda taxes hurt the poor. They also paid for studies that say drinking soda DIDN'T cause obesity."
    - LinuxBender 4y ago
      In my opinion corporations that lobby/bribe to harm people should be handled differently than the internet censorship issue. In those cases I believe that such entities and all related parties should be considered a domestic terrorist and anyone that lobbied for them or any politician that took said bribes should be branded as aiding and abetting a domestic terrorist. There are already laws on the books for handling such people. If the offending company is international then it is no longer just domestic. Why domestic terrorist? Easy, they are intentionally harming people for profit. The mortality impact is very slow but there is a myriad of scientific data to prove the harm. Just type-2 diabetes alone may bankrupt most first world countries [1]. [1] - https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2017/p0718-diabetes-report.html https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2017/p0718-diabetes-repor... (2017) [this has only gotten worse]
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    Coca Cola's corporate propaganda is ubiquitous. They certainly are not innocent.

edgyquant 4y ago

The companies build services designed to addict children and make bullying ten times easier. Fuck your politics, this is evil shit and these companies need held accountable. We don’t allow kids to purchase alcohol and blame the parents when they get alcohol poisoning. We make sure companies don’t target alcohol at kids.

hospadar 4y ago

Maybe let's not jail anyone? Putting kid's parents in jail is a surefire way to make sure that kids life becomes a stressful, scary, unsupported nightmare. Parents who let their kids use social media (i.e. almost every parent whose family has access to technology) are a lot better than no parents at all.