5 ms·

> What content children get exposed to has always been the responsibility of parents. Assuming this bill has honest intentions (I don't believe it does) the iss

by kmlx 3y ago

> What content children get exposed to has always been the responsibility of parents. Assuming this bill has honest intentions (I don't believe it does) the issue here is more that parents are giving their children unrestricted access to the internet. true, but the problem a friend of mine has is that he has no control over internet access for his kids outside his home. this matter isn’t black and white. > in the UK if you're doing something impolite you're generally breaking the law... Swearing in public? That's a public order offence. Saying something mean online? That's hate speech. Protesting fossil fuels? That's disruptive. And so on.. it’s exactly the same across europe.

knome 3y ago
parents have never had control over what media their kids can get at outside of the home.
- kmlx 3y ago
  agree, but the internet is a different kind of monster.
  - BizarroLand 3y ago
    A different kind of monster that today's parents grew up with almost completely unharmed.
- kypro 3y ago
  This is basically my position on it. At home my parents were always very careful what content I was exposed to. With very few exceptions I wasn't allowed to watch / play films and video games that were 12+ until I was in secondary school. But outside my home (especially coming from a crappy neighbourhood) I was exposed to a lot of explicit content from other children (and their parents). Obviously the internet exacerbates this problem, but short of outlawing the entire internet there's very little that can actually be done about that. Even with all of the proposed restrictions kids will still be able to access explicit content if their parents allow them to do so. So if what we really want is to empower parents then there are better ways to do this at home via ISPs and routers with configurable content filters. And if we want proof for this then we should remember that this isn't an issue that exists at school because they have the internet locked down. The idea that the only way to we empower parents is by handing control to the government and corporations makes no sense. The issue is that parents either don't care to or don't know how to restrict content. If it's the former, this isn't a problem (assuming you believe rights of the parent trump that of the state), if it's latter, then let's just create regulation for ISPs to ensure they're providing sufficiently easy and capable content filters. Requiring all content providers operating in the UK break encryption and implement their own content filters is beyond absurd. It really only makes sense if you assume the state is doing this intentionally as a power grab.
ikura 3y ago
Another part of the problem is that companies aren't incentivised to provide parents with the controls they need. Why can't I block an entire channel in YouTube Kids if I know that they make inappropriate content? I have to block every single video? I would hope any legislative efforts focus on incentivising sensible features such as that, but I'm gonna assume I already know the answer to that wish.

by kmlx 3y ago

knome 3y ago

parents have never had control over what media their kids can get at outside of the home.

kmlx 3y ago
agree, but the internet is a different kind of monster.
- BizarroLand 3y ago
  A different kind of monster that today's parents grew up with almost completely unharmed.
kypro 3y ago
This is basically my position on it. At home my parents were always very careful what content I was exposed to. With very few exceptions I wasn't allowed to watch / play films and video games that were 12+ until I was in secondary school. But outside my home (especially coming from a crappy neighbourhood) I was exposed to a lot of explicit content from other children (and their parents). Obviously the internet exacerbates this problem, but short of outlawing the entire internet there's very little that can actually be done about that. Even with all of the proposed restrictions kids will still be able to access explicit content if their parents allow them to do so. So if what we really want is to empower parents then there are better ways to do this at home via ISPs and routers with configurable content filters. And if we want proof for this then we should remember that this isn't an issue that exists at school because they have the internet locked down. The idea that the only way to we empower parents is by handing control to the government and corporations makes no sense. The issue is that parents either don't care to or don't know how to restrict content. If it's the former, this isn't a problem (assuming you believe rights of the parent trump that of the state), if it's latter, then let's just create regulation for ISPs to ensure they're providing sufficiently easy and capable content filters. Requiring all content providers operating in the UK break encryption and implement their own content filters is beyond absurd. It really only makes sense if you assume the state is doing this intentionally as a power grab.

ikura 3y ago

Another part of the problem is that companies aren't incentivised to provide parents with the controls they need. Why can't I block an entire channel in YouTube Kids if I know that they make inappropriate content? I have to block every single video? I would hope any legislative efforts focus on incentivising sensible features such as that, but I'm gonna assume I already know the answer to that wish.