3 ms·

Here's an even simpler solution: Parents parent their children and pay attention to what they do online instead of letting third parties decide what is or isn't

Here's an even simpler solution: Parents parent their children and pay attention to what they do online instead of letting third parties decide what is or isn't appropriate for their children to see, but I guess we've decided to abandon that idea for some reason. > Device-level protection doesn't work for kids that can break into the bootloader or jailbreak the machine their parents got for them, but not many things realistically will. Kids that are clever enough to hack their devices to get around those kinds of restrictions are probably old enough and smart enough to not need the censoring.

johnnyanmac 3y ago
>Parents parent their children and pay attention to what they do online instead of letting third parties decide what is or isn't appropriate for their children to see I think both of you are making the same point. offer options not mandates. internet or device filters are options a parent can enable, not mandates in order to not have Child Protective Services at their door. if some highly religious parent wants to shut down everything except the Bible that's their choice (not one I agree with, but a choice). If a parent trusts their kid to have free reign over the internet that's also a choice (I imagine that's how many of us were raised, before such filters even existed).
- codedokode 3y ago
  For options to be available, you need regulations. Today without regulations there is no OS that would provide a single checkbox like "show only content appropriate for N year old". It seems that there is no motivation for device and OS manufacturers to invest into implementing such options and filters.