4 ms·

parental controls is not a valid solution I disagree. It does not have to be perfect, certainly not in the first pass given that right now there is no working

parental controls is not a valid solution I disagree. It does not have to be perfect, certainly not in the first pass given that right now there is no working solution at all. It just has to cover most of the popular web clients on phones and tablets to cover the small children. With time devices and web agents can iterate through improvements. In terms of bypassing, teens will bypass it but they can just visit sites that a database would never be enforced on in the first place. Many teens today know a myriad of ways to bypass restrictions for porn, drugs, pirating movies and games but that is a different issue all together. Trying to fix this for teens will just splinter the internet even more and will not accomplish anything. By requiring any site that has adult or user-generated site to add a header any client or government can verify that header is in place. If not they can be reported and the company fined after the implementation phase / period is over. The current solution does not even exist. Creating centralized databases will clearly just lead to endless lawsuits and just divides of the internet per state which is nearly impossible to enforce. That only benefits feeding the starving lawyers and VPN providers.

rcme 3y ago
You’re just severely underestimating kids. If it’s enforced at the client level, kids will download a more permissive client. It’s so easy to bypass. Kids are highly motivated, highly intelligent, and have a ton of time.
- LinuxBender 3y ago
  You’re just severely underestimating kids. I am not underestimating anyone. If a kid is curious enough and smart enough they can bypass anything just as their older teen peers. I would suggest if a kid is smart enough to know what they want to watch then they can probably handle the content or just go to one of the many sites not using the centralized databases as their older teen peers would. That of course should be a discussion between them and their parents. Maybe Usenet will make a come-back by the demand of clever children. If a kid is not ready for said content and they still bypass it then it should be on their parent to educate them and/or discipline them as with anything else between a parent and child. If it is leading to problems then social services will sort it out as they would with any other parental issue. People must not accept going down this dystopian route of building a centralized ID and even more censorious technology that could easily be extended to any content, not just adult. [Edit] I should also point out that most tablet and phone OS's support having child accounts. Child accounts can not install any applications.
  - rcme 3y ago
    Ah, I see. So you're essentially arguing that content shouldn't be restricted to children because they're either ready to view the content on should be educated by their parents on why they shouldn't view the content. That's different than your initial argument that parental controls provide adequate content restrictions.
    - LinuxBender 3y ago
      My primary argument is that right now there is literally no working solution. I offered a solution that will cover most use cases and protect most children and that is trivial to implement by both websites and browser developers and keeps the decisions on the parents. It was implemented without corresponding legislation in the past and I am certain the knowledge has not been lost. Once implemented it can be improved upon with time using feedback from the parents.

rcme 3y ago

You’re just severely underestimating kids. If it’s enforced at the client level, kids will download a more permissive client. It’s so easy to bypass. Kids are highly motivated, highly intelligent, and have a ton of time.

LinuxBender 3y ago
You’re just severely underestimating kids. I am not underestimating anyone. If a kid is curious enough and smart enough they can bypass anything just as their older teen peers. I would suggest if a kid is smart enough to know what they want to watch then they can probably handle the content or just go to one of the many sites not using the centralized databases as their older teen peers would. That of course should be a discussion between them and their parents. Maybe Usenet will make a come-back by the demand of clever children. If a kid is not ready for said content and they still bypass it then it should be on their parent to educate them and/or discipline them as with anything else between a parent and child. If it is leading to problems then social services will sort it out as they would with any other parental issue. People must not accept going down this dystopian route of building a centralized ID and even more censorious technology that could easily be extended to any content, not just adult. [Edit] I should also point out that most tablet and phone OS's support having child accounts. Child accounts can not install any applications.
- rcme 3y ago
  Ah, I see. So you're essentially arguing that content shouldn't be restricted to children because they're either ready to view the content on should be educated by their parents on why they shouldn't view the content. That's different than your initial argument that parental controls provide adequate content restrictions.
  - LinuxBender 3y ago
    My primary argument is that right now there is literally no working solution. I offered a solution that will cover most use cases and protect most children and that is trivial to implement by both websites and browser developers and keeps the decisions on the parents. It was implemented without corresponding legislation in the past and I am certain the knowledge has not been lost. Once implemented it can be improved upon with time using feedback from the parents.