18 ms·

i'm a supporter of tor, but i'm not sure why they're making this out to be so alarming. t-mobile clearly presents its filtering as a family-safe content filter

by there 15y ago

i'm a supporter of tor, but i'm not sure why they're making this out to be so alarming. t-mobile clearly presents its filtering as a family-safe content filter, and tor is software that makes it easy to bypass content filtering. this is only setup by default on pre-paid accounts because anyone can purchase a pre-paid SIM without being over 18. i would expect the same kind of filtering at a library or school, and any other internet service that one can purchase like cable or dsl service typically requires that someone over 18 be present during installation. i can just imagine the silly backlash over a parent complaining to the media because their child was able to look at porn by putting a pre-paid SIM in their android phone. i recently purchased a pre-paid SIM from t-mobile US and was kind of surprised they didn't ask for any identification when purchasing (more so because i would have thought the government would have mandated some kind of tracking of phone numbers for going after drug dealers or something). once i logged into t-mobile's website, the form to disable this content filtering was easy to find and required giving proof of being over 18 (which they say is not stored or associated with the account after verification).

drewcrawford 15y ago
Requiring you to be over 18 to use "the real Internet" also requires you to present a government ID. Which means, effectively, anonymous or pseudonymous use of the Internet is dead. This may be a problem if you'd like to criticize your government. Independently of whether or not you think that is a good idea in theory, it is unworkable in practice. There will always be coffee shops and open access points and neighbors to mooch off of for the kids to get ahold of porn. Your media backlash is now merely shifted from Vodaphone to the local mom & pop. TL;DR - an Internet license is no substitute for proper parenting.
- bwarp 15y ago
  You don't have to have a "government ID" or present ID. That's a fallacy. You just have to provide reasonable evidence that you are a not a minor. Pubic hair is usually enough. It's a choice the providers made to protect their arses from lawsuits, not the government. There are a lot of paranoid people here. Edit: to explain the "pubic hair" comment is sarcasm relating to how lax the verification process is. Judging by the time of day, lots of humor-challenged Americans have woken up.
  - mike-cardwell 15y ago
    I for one regularly use my pubic hair as proof of age.

by there 15y ago

drewcrawford 15y ago

Requiring you to be over 18 to use "the real Internet" also requires you to present a government ID. Which means, effectively, anonymous or pseudonymous use of the Internet is dead. This may be a problem if you'd like to criticize your government. Independently of whether or not you think that is a good idea in theory, it is unworkable in practice. There will always be coffee shops and open access points and neighbors to mooch off of for the kids to get ahold of porn. Your media backlash is now merely shifted from Vodaphone to the local mom & pop. TL;DR - an Internet license is no substitute for proper parenting.

bwarp 15y ago
You don't have to have a "government ID" or present ID. That's a fallacy. You just have to provide reasonable evidence that you are a not a minor. Pubic hair is usually enough. It's a choice the providers made to protect their arses from lawsuits, not the government. There are a lot of paranoid people here. Edit: to explain the "pubic hair" comment is sarcasm relating to how lax the verification process is. Judging by the time of day, lots of humor-challenged Americans have woken up.
- mike-cardwell 15y ago
  I for one regularly use my pubic hair as proof of age.