5 ms·

Well, if implemented properly I think it's OK. Back in the Internet Explorer days, Microsoft used to block adult sites on device based on the RTA header adult s

by rany_ 3y ago

Well, if implemented properly I think it's OK. Back in the Internet Explorer days, Microsoft used to block adult sites on device based on the RTA header adult sites added themselves. I think if adult sites were required to use the RTA header and device manufacturers/OS/browser makers forced to obey it; it's an OK compromise. All the well known adult sites are already using it, it's just up to the browser makers to support it again... and besides, with on-device AI they don't even need to only rely on the RTA header if they want to make their implementation more advanced. More info: https://davidwalsh.name/rta-label https://davidwalsh.name/rta-label

johnnyanmac 3y ago
Tech industry has long burned through its goodwill. I don't trust that such securities will only stop at "adult sites". I don't trust the implementation to only verify the RTA header and not be used to track a bunch of other data, on the web and on your computer habits. It doesn't even fix the "problem". Multiple accounts can use the same device so hardware level checks either have to block all or nothing. These kinds of tech forget people share devices, at home and to each other
- ndriscoll 3y ago
  With something like the RTA label, the site sends the header, so it can't be used to track you. The browser would then, upon seeing that header, call an OS-provided parental controls library which could e.g. do nothing (parental controls not enabled), block the content, or prompt the user to put in an unlock password. It's not a hard problem. TVs and video game consoles already have this kind of system.
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    Tvs are the exact fear I have for such tech. All the stuff you can't turn off or has been argued to even turn itself on after explicitly saying not too. It's not a hard problem so they'll find a way to make it harder and more profitable. Modern consoles don't really have publicly accessible web browsers so that's another way to solve the problem. 17+ rated games would simply check the age on your profile instead of needing a device centric verification.
    - ndriscoll 3y ago
      I'm not sure what you have to fear with the TV analogy. The biggest issue with parental controls in TVs was that no one knows they're there to turn on. The design was always that TV channels broadcast the ratings information, and if you configured it and set a password, then the TV would block any content outside of the rating you configured it to allow. That's exactly how the RTA header would function. It's all client-side decision making based on server provided metadata. There's nothing to track. Every TV in the US has been required to work this way for over 20 years.
      - johnnyanmac 3y ago
        >I'm not sure what you have to fear with the TV analogy. It's a tangential discussion that doesn't have to do with blocking content. As it is these days, TV's are a device that with no control of my own chooses to send telemetry data back home in order to sell my data to 3rd parties for ads. This subsidizes "smart" TV's, but given that there are no more mid-high end "dumb" TV's, this feels less like a choice than a mandate of the industry. On top of all this, there has been murmur of dark patterns related to making sure your TV is internet-connected, which includes trying to connect to an open network after you opt out of a network connection, and having unlisted 4/5G modems built into the tv that are unusable by the consumer but otherwise made to send data out, even if the consumer does not connect to a network. I'm honestly sort of surprised GDPR hasn't come down on this yet. ---- So the header check you describe with computer devices aren't necessarily a concern by itself. But it's a slippery slope one that has been exploited by so many companies so consistently when it comes to matters like this. The world over still hasn't properly litigated to make sure that companies can't simply grab whatever data they want and sell it, so we're in a game of cat and mouse until then. And as a mouse I simply see this piece of cheese with a looming shadow above it.

by rany_ 3y ago

johnnyanmac 3y ago

Tech industry has long burned through its goodwill. I don't trust that such securities will only stop at "adult sites". I don't trust the implementation to only verify the RTA header and not be used to track a bunch of other data, on the web and on your computer habits. It doesn't even fix the "problem". Multiple accounts can use the same device so hardware level checks either have to block all or nothing. These kinds of tech forget people share devices, at home and to each other

ndriscoll 3y ago
With something like the RTA label, the site sends the header, so it can't be used to track you. The browser would then, upon seeing that header, call an OS-provided parental controls library which could e.g. do nothing (parental controls not enabled), block the content, or prompt the user to put in an unlock password. It's not a hard problem. TVs and video game consoles already have this kind of system.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  Tvs are the exact fear I have for such tech. All the stuff you can't turn off or has been argued to even turn itself on after explicitly saying not too. It's not a hard problem so they'll find a way to make it harder and more profitable. Modern consoles don't really have publicly accessible web browsers so that's another way to solve the problem. 17+ rated games would simply check the age on your profile instead of needing a device centric verification.
  - ndriscoll 3y ago
    I'm not sure what you have to fear with the TV analogy. The biggest issue with parental controls in TVs was that no one knows they're there to turn on. The design was always that TV channels broadcast the ratings information, and if you configured it and set a password, then the TV would block any content outside of the rating you configured it to allow. That's exactly how the RTA header would function. It's all client-side decision making based on server provided metadata. There's nothing to track. Every TV in the US has been required to work this way for over 20 years.
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      >I'm not sure what you have to fear with the TV analogy. It's a tangential discussion that doesn't have to do with blocking content. As it is these days, TV's are a device that with no control of my own chooses to send telemetry data back home in order to sell my data to 3rd parties for ads. This subsidizes "smart" TV's, but given that there are no more mid-high end "dumb" TV's, this feels less like a choice than a mandate of the industry. On top of all this, there has been murmur of dark patterns related to making sure your TV is internet-connected, which includes trying to connect to an open network after you opt out of a network connection, and having unlisted 4/5G modems built into the tv that are unusable by the consumer but otherwise made to send data out, even if the consumer does not connect to a network. I'm honestly sort of surprised GDPR hasn't come down on this yet. ---- So the header check you describe with computer devices aren't necessarily a concern by itself. But it's a slippery slope one that has been exploited by so many companies so consistently when it comes to matters like this. The world over still hasn't properly litigated to make sure that companies can't simply grab whatever data they want and sell it, so we're in a game of cat and mouse until then. And as a mouse I simply see this piece of cheese with a looming shadow above it.